There now officially exists ONE count of AOB fraud.

Though sources from Florida cite a 500% (roughly, conservative if I recall) increase in AOB's and lawsuits, alleging massive AOB fraud upon the courts and insurers, I personally have only been able to locate/cite one instance, thanks to the article below finally confirming it. I have been following the case as best possible.

Please, anyone feel free to correct me if there are more, so one may attempt to get to the real numbers of "fraud" that is actually being committed via AOB's, rather than vague attempts to paint them all as "fraudulent and abusive".

Frankly, I never would have guessed that anyone would be dumb enough to walk into court with forged AOB's, to actually commit fraud, and as one person told me, "if it WAS happening why haven't the insurer's quickly and easily exposed it?", a question that I could not logically answer or argue with.

Well, there's now ONE case. Are there more, or will insurers now cite the many hundreds of cases of fraud via AOB's, all ONE of them?

JMHNLO and LOL

https://www.glassbytes.com/2018/01/judge-rules-in-favor-of-geico-in-vip-auto-glass-lawsuit/

Good point Mark. It’s no surprise that you can find a case of fraud. Let’s be honest, in the business world there are many shady characters, so why wouldn’t that exist in our industry. It is interesting to note as you did how few cases of “assignment” fraud exist. That’s small potatoes compared to what TPAs and insurers do. I guess political powers aren’t the only ones who use propaganda effectively.
By the way, don’t criticize AGRR. I did so (kind of?) in a question about Manufacturers Install Guides and it got deleted.

contact the consumer protection coalition.

all is listed there
then I hope you come back and say "Im sorry"
once you read about the amount and degree of this problem.

Let me chime I here.

Tpa,s and the insures are the biggest fraudster's out there.

Their fraud adds up to billions not millions.

Let's continue the thread dealing with that fraud problem.

They are the ones who have created this assignment problem with their price fixing

scheme. Let's talk to the courts about this issue 1st.

I personally have bypassed this TPA fraud years ago and make a fairly decent living

now. We can afford to advertise, have a legal team and invest our profit's elsewhere

yes we have money left over at the end of the month.

What a joke ! So I video taped a complete install on 2008 chevy silverado pickup . Two technicians did the job " by the book " removing all the parts , drilling holes , replacing clips etc... you get the point . Job from start ( pre inspetion with customer ) to complete ( going over all post installation instructions with the customer ) 1 hour and 15 minutes . TPA says labor for job is $ 88.00 total . That caculates to roughly $ 19.00 dollars per hour . Now lets see who in thier right mind would like to justify that !!! Soon all that will be left is the big **** and a bunch of hacks !!

That is what they want Joe.

When they run out all the major competition through the fraud they commit

then their left with the hacks.

Hacks pose no threat to their business model they scoop up all the **** that

Safelite doesn't want and don't complain about anything.

Any competition to Safelite they either buy out or Sue like they did the guy's in

Colorado years ago.

OMG, this is just too funny.

Would this be the Consumer Protection Coalition site from FL, that is made up of Insurers members almost exclusively?

The one that reads the amount and degree of the problem as insurers being slapped by lawsuits when insurers even QUESTION a claim? (a right they have in virtually every policy I have ever read)

The one that confuses Assignment of RIGHTS, clearly not allowed in ANY policy I have read, with Assignment of BENEFITS? (one would cause the insurer to gain additional unknown insureds and risks, hence it's not allowed in the policy, understandably so, but the latter does NOT. This one has been put to rest so many times I can't believe anyone is still trying to muddy the water with it)

The one that cites how the LAWSUITS are going to cause CONSUMER harm by forcing insurers to raise insurance rates, thereby causing consumers to not be able to afford a home?

The one that does not explain how a fraudster can possibly walk into a court of law with fraudulent, undocumentable charges for repairs that will force an insurer to PAY? (the ONE example in the top of the string clearly proves they could NOT)

The one that cites AOB's as the problem, printed a petition for folks to fill out demanding their lawmakers to support AOB reform, after they scared them with the 'ol higher premiums jargon?

The one that fails to provide any (let alone rampant) examples of fraud, but really only speaks to AOB REFORMS, to make AOB's fraudulent, instead of actually fighting fraud? (which should be easy to PROVE)

The one that fails to explain how fraudulent AOBs could POSSIBLY make an insurer pay MORE out for a LEGITIMATE claim if ANY FRAUD was actually being committed? (Because it could NOT possibly BE a legitimate claim if there WAS fraud committed?)

Or is it one of the others that have consumer protection coalition in their URL's, that basic anti-virus blocks malicious web attacks as soon as you click on their links?

Sorry, I'm laughing too hard to be sorry. LOL

JMHNLO

Mark
we always say we care about our customers. If we really did we would be taking a stand against those that use assignment of benefits to hurt the auto glass industry reputation. Making it harder for all of us to be in it.

well I read what they said and I read it all. (im not sure you did)

I guess there are some people who still believe the earth is flat too.

but here is what I read: their story not mine.
assignment of benefits is not illegal most policy holders think what they ARE signing is permission for the insurance company to pay the shop directly but they are tricked into signing an Assignment of benefits.

in Florida alone 28,000 (far more than 1) lawsuits filed by glass shops in 2016 alone.
The numbers for 2017 are still being collected but it is already many more.
THATS JUST FLORIDA

assignment of benefits was designed 50 years ago so a Policy holder could higher a lawyer to handle their claim work on their behalf if they felt they where not compensated fairly.
But it wasn't in its creation only limited to lawyers.... big mistake

So now we have glass shops, roofers using this loophole to high jack the rights to the claim.
Then they over bill and file a lawsuit for the short pay. When they sue because they have the rights to the claim (with an AOB) they are suing in the name of the policy holder.

now the policy holder has sued their insurance company and doesn't even know it.

Insurance company cancels the policy and that insured has no chance of getting insurance because they have sued their insurance company.
(this question is asked (have you sued a ins company) when you get insurance and if you didn't know and say NO, it doesn't matter you have committed insurance fraud thus making yourself uninsurable)

Assignment of benefit lawsuits are going to make changes to our industry that we will feel and be inconvenienced by for a long time to come.

http://fightfraud.today/auto-glass.html

I, what is the definition of fraud, could it be boiled do to the altering of an invoice
from a shop?

why would you believe that fraud is a one way offense, that only the creator of the invoice is guilty of fraud?

why do insurance costs vary between carriers, why does the cost of w/s reimbursement not vary?

From where does the right to set the price come, in the legal sense, for either shop or insurer?

where does your right to limit claims costs intersect with shops right to make a living?

Chairman’s CEO Roundtable
Why Invest in the CEO Roundtable?
Chairman’s CEO Roundtable members play an important and visible role in the development of Florida’s future. It is truly a partnership between Florida’s most outstanding and forward-thinking business advocate and Florida’s most outstanding and successful companies. Florida employers are eligible to participate with a minimum annual investment of $100,000.



What Are the Benefits of CEO Roundtable Membership?
Private CEO Roundtable meetings
Membership to Florida Chamber Political Institute
Sponsorship and advertising at the Florida Chamber’s Annual Meeting and Capitol Days events
Regular meetings with the President of the Chamber to review your top statewide issues
On-site customized political briefing for top management from Florida Chamber senior leaders
Membership on the Florida Chamber of Commerce Board of Governors
Participate in the Florida Chamber’s Annual Meeting
Invitation to attend Florida Chamber statewide events
Receive the annual Where We Stand and How They Voted publications to track important issues facing your business
Receive an inside look at the legislative session by attending regional Legislative Session Briefings before and after session
Invitation to participate in the Florida Chamber’s Small Business Council and International Business Council
Weekly updates on Florida Business Agenda items during each legislative session
Invitation to provide input in developing the annual Florida Business Agenda
Exclusive subscription to Chamber Insider and other communications
Opportunity for your employees to participate in Grassroots Action Information Network


who is paying a minimum of 100000 yr to send out this message i ?

People!!! Read Marks comment again (or 10 times or however many times it takes) There is a huge difference between assignment of benefits and assignment of rights. The first puts you in the shoes of the insured to collect what the insurer owes you. No more, no less. The latter would give a person all the rights of the policy, ie: “Ok cousin Joey, you’re a lousy driver and no one will insure you so I’ll sign a document saying you can drive under my policy.”
Do you really think it’s a bad idea for shops to be able to collect what is owed them? If they committed fraud or overcharged the insurer don’t you think the judge or arbitrator can figure that out? Insurers routinely use TPAs to underpay shops knowing that most don’t have the knowledge or the courage to do something about it. Why not take the one way we have to collect away from us, right?
Unbelievable.

Scary, some of the replies, aren't they Freddy?

An AOB is designed so a person could go after his insurer, but it wasn't limited to an attorney, but should have been. Ya, that makes perfect sense. IF you're an insurer and can afford the time and attorney, or know your client can't or won't.

Another implies that an insured will commit fraud by not knowing the shop sued the insurer for payment, then possibly commits fraud by answering a question on an insurance application if they've ever sued an insurer? WHAT INSURANCE APPLICATION COULD POSSIBLY CONTAIN THAT QUESTION?

But the best, is that in the name of the glass industry or at least its appearance, repairers should give up a tool that allows them to enter a court, appraisal, or arbitration "for the good of the industry"? WHY? Any other entity that does not pay its bills looks like the bum, not the collecting party.

Once again, I point out, it is unlikely that fraudsters are walking into courts of law filing fraudulent suits against insurers. Insurers have all the tools at their disposal to investigate and prosecute fraud, and taxpayers pay for many of them through State Insurance Dept Fraud Units. Hence my post starting this string that there now exists ONE CASE of a fraudster walking into court to commit fraud.

NOT 28000 fraudulent lawsuits. O N E fraudulent lawsuit. Granted, one so far, but, ONE.

JMHNLO & LOL

OK SAFELITE TROLL WE WILL GIVE UP OUR AOB, YEA RIGHT

In some states, courts have ruled that an arbitration is not a legal action. Many auto policies have a provision for arbitration, so why would insurers act shocked if shops (in the shoes of the insured if the shop has a valid assignment) file arbitrations to collect short pays? If the shop overcharged or the insurer underpaid, the arbitrator can sort things out. Either way, as Mark asked, “where are the thousands of cases of fraud?”
Oh, and another thing to remember. States haven’t required insurers to put arbitration clauses in their policies to protect the insurers. It’s a provision to protect consumers, and by extension via assignments, conscientious shops that refuse to put unreasonable demand by insurers ahead of the safety and well being of their customer. And remember, the customer is the vehicle owner, NOT the insurance company.

Good God mark you need to read what people wrote.

its not fraud nor did anyone say it was for the insured until they tell their insurance company when getting insurance they have NEVER sued an insurance carrier.

I really doubt that you understand what is happening here. or you are just playing dumb... good job at that

the use AGR companies are grabbing the assignment of Benefits with is NOT what it was intended for.
it is a loophole exploiting people.
if you told your customer what you intended to do with the AOB they would NEVER sign it.
but if you thinks its ok to do it go for it, I actually don't want to make enemies of my customers.
look up the word "Pariah" that will be your future

My customers know that I use the assignment to get paid in full and they applaud me for it. They realize the abuse of power that insurance companies wield. You’re wrong to attack Mark. His posts are always relevant and on point from my point of view. Just my opinion, which I’m entitled to. Oh by the way, I’ve been in business for almost 40 years and I’m not a pariah yet. How long have you done Auto Glass?

Freddy
I think and I hope you are confusing assignment of benefits with permission to pay the shop directly. they are two different animals.

AOB is indented and used to generate a lawsuit from the beginning.

The intent from the start is to over bill so the claim is short paid (but not really) then sue for the short pay on the policy holders behalf.
There is not a customer on the planet (who if they knew you are suing in their name) would be ok with that.
I stand by what I said and if you are using AOB to sue insurance companies.... you are part of the problem. You are why insurance companies will be doing inspection and other measures to make our lives difficult.
This is why legislation is coming into place because this is wrong.
if it was right no law would even be proposed.

I have been in the glass business for 45 years plus.

I find your caviler attitude toward this topic either uninformed or despicable or both.

i guess we will have to agree to disagree. To me, shops like you are the problem.

Freddy, I am with you on this. Not only are shops like his the problem, they actually created the problem in the first place.

Agreed. My customers are outraged when they find out my shop has been short paid. I have repeat customers who have used me for decades because they trust us and love the quality of our work. Many have horror stories from times that they caved in and let their insurance company steer them to another shop. Several years ago there was an article in a local news paper that was slanted in favor of insurance companies. I started getting calls asking if my shop was one that took action when short paid. When I said yes, they replied that they wanted to use my shop because I was willing to stick up for my customers.
I said it before and I’ll say it again. Insurance companies HAVE to put arbitration clauses in their policies because Commerce departments have made them, not because they’re nice guys. They have abused their power and Commerce departments are providing insures with a way to keep the process fair. Most insureds don’t want to fight their insurance company, but are happy to allow shops to fight for them. If shops want to allow insurers to dictate ridiculously low prices that’s their choice. I choose to charge a fair and reasonable retail price, not wholesale prices. That allows us to do the quality work we have always provided, and my reputation has stayed intact. If I get short paid I’m going after the balance owed EVERY TIME. My choice, and an assignment is the tool that I need and use.

Dear Mr. Reading,

I wonder what your role in the "glass business" these past 45 years has been. I found your post much more cavalier than Freddy's.

Could it be that the AOB has proven to be a last resort by a shop owner in order to take back control of his business, to reassert his right to set his own prices and to avoid having to deal with a direct competitor during the claim settlement process? IMHO auto insurers have created the monster. They are the ones that are colluding with a service provider in order to take (illegal) control of setting prices (not for their insurance policies) but for services provided by a totally different industry!

How do you explain the fact that insurers today offer less for a windshield repair than they did over 20 years ago?

How do you explain the fact that insurers have depressed and controlled windshield repair prices for your 45+ years of experience?

Why should any service provider be forced to deal with a direct competitor during the claim settlement process?

Please explain why insurers are allowed to contract with a biased service provider to administer their auto glass claims?

If policyholders have the right to choose the service provider and insurers are banned from steering policyholders to or from a service provider, please explain why any service provider would feel the need to join a network, especially if said network was controlled by a direct competitor and a condition of membership took away the right to set prices?

I know for a fact that thousands of windshield repair invoices which were submitted at less than the price advertized on the website of the biased service provider administering the claims have been short paid.

I know for a fact that it would have been cheaper for the insurer to simply pay for the original REASONABLE invoices than to short pay and then lose in arbitration. (Especially if they have to pay legal fees as they do in Florida)

And let’s be clear. Insurers are setting prices for Autoglass repair and replacement in states that have “right to choose” statutes. The simple fact is, if an insurer can set prices he can steer insureds to shops that are willing to charge the prices set by the insurer. You can’t have one without the other. Insurers ARE breaking the law in states that give insureds the right to choose their service provider.

Freddy
Can you give some examples where this is happening
As you say it is? The specific states

Why? Are you saying there aren’t states with statutes that allow the insured to choose where their car is to be serviced?

Or are you saying that insurers aren’t setting prices???? Just wondering.

Bill,

Can you give us an example of a state where it isn't happening?

Fact is Bel/Safe is a Global company with DEEP pockets. They have definitely inserted themselves between Independents & Insurance companies nationwide. Bel/Safe takes the claim, tries to steer all replacements to their own shops, sets pricing for all other shops doing replacements & handles all complaint issues from work done for Insurance companies. (including complaints against them) They get paid to take & process the claim, do as many replacements as they can steer to themselves & have taken on the responsibility to weed out any "undesirables" in the industry. The Insurance companies take the stance they have an independent watchdog in the industry guarding against any wrongdoing.
Anyone interested in buying the Brooklyn Bridge please contact me

Insurance companies knowingly collude with "Bel/Safe" because it allows them to control the pricing of the other 80+% of service providers in the auto glass industry PERIOD.