by Guest » Tue Aug 05, 2008 09:36 pm
Okay, went and got an estimate from a Geico express site today for a 2008 Toyota Matrix. The car is about 5 months old and has 5,000 miles. They want to give me aftermarket parts on a practically new car. Even worse, the shop that's attached to the Geico Auto Repair Express site is a certified Toyota repair shop.
1. Isn't a 5 month old car new enough to get certified parts?
2. Doesn't a certified shop have to use certified parts?
3. Do I have any recourse here? Is there any sort of leverage when dealing with a Geico adjuster? Does the lawyer card work? How about mentioning that I work for a local newspaper?
1. Isn't a 5 month old car new enough to get certified parts?
2. Doesn't a certified shop have to use certified parts?
3. Do I have any recourse here? Is there any sort of leverage when dealing with a Geico adjuster? Does the lawyer card work? How about mentioning that I work for a local newspaper?
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 08:59 pm Post Subject:
The NHTSA crash tests new vehicles.
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:17 am Post Subject:
Ok, but I don't see where they test ANY vehicles with ANY replacment parts.
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 02:20 pm Post Subject:
Replacing a genuine bolt on part with another genuine bolt part would more than likely produce no change. Too bad they do not test aftermarket parts or even a vehicle that has been repaired using say an OEM new core support.
The tragedy occurs when a vehicle was purchased by the consumer based on a NHTSA crash test rating and then after a front end collision an aftermarket core support, bumper reinforcement, bumper brackets hood and two fenders are used. This has the potential to alter the air bag timing and now is an untested frankenstein machine. For an insurance company to mandate the use of these crash parts is a disservice to an unsuspecting consumer. The diminished value is huge but the much bigger issue is safety. Most consumers, especially those with children, want a vehicle that will protect their family, as best as possible, in the event of a collision. Should the air bag timing become altered and the airbag deploy too late causing it to smack you in the face after the impact is just rude.
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 04:18 pm Post Subject:
CAPA CERTIFIED PARTS are only test fit certfied. No representations are made as to the quality of the metal or the safety of the part. Along with the CAPA label "another warning label" should be affixed alerting the consumer that these parts have not been crash tested but merely test fit only.
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 05:09 pm Post Subject:
They reverse engineer these parts. They copy cat them just like an old mattel thing -a-majig or creepy crawly toy maker from the sixties. They assume that they will survive a crash test because american car manufacturers have spent a lot of invested money proving that the original do. But some posters have made it clear how they feel about assumptions.
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 08:05 pm Post Subject:
The company(s) I work for do not use ANY a/m structure components....at all....as noted prior though apparently there have been some crash tests with aftermarket outter sheet metal with good outcomes...
Personall I wish all companies would sell endorcements for new oems parts replacement only...It sure would make everyones job much much easier.
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 08:41 pm Post Subject:
I stand corrected, they have only tested hoods. But the _reason_ AM parts have not been tested is that they don't need to be. It's been shown that they don't provide any safety factors (just another way the OEM try to scare people).
I would particularly like to see the results of a core support or bumper reinforcement as these components are generally considered structural and have influence on air bag timing.
I don't know of any insurance companies that don't only use CAPA parts. I don't see that CAPA certifies the parts you have mentioned... so I tend to thing that insurance companies don't use them. Perhaps just another way people are meant to be scared by AM parts.http://www.capacertified.org/whatparts.asp
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 01:41 am Post Subject:
........................Some of you will recall the cover story of the February 1999 issue of "Consumer Reports" that featured another hood that flew up in the face of a Honda Accord owner. That also was a CAPA-certified part with a major nonconformity that caused it and others like it to fly in the face of its owners......
...................What spurred this rhetorical question is the most recent incident in which a CAPA-certified aftermarket replacement hood on a Toyota Tacoma opened unexpectedly when a technician took it for a test drive. What preliminary investigations have determined is that the secondary striker on the hood contained a nonconformity................
http://www.bodyshopbusiness.com/Article/3419/more_jackinthebox_hoods.aspx
Some insurance companies use CAPA certified aftermaket parts only and others use any aftermarket available. Since CAPA is a test fit only certification it is probably beyond the scope of their involvement to actually weld on a part to test its fitment. Anyone who has ever had to use these parts and try to produce an invisable repair knows they are rarely as good as original.
http://www.search-autoparts.com/searchautoparts/Industry+News/CAPA-decertifies-non-OEM-hood-cites-improper-safet/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/20131
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 02:05 am Post Subject:
Again, I'm really hoping we are not going to beat a dead horse as all of this information has been discussed in a prior thread.
But without going into details let me ask... are OEM parts perfect? Let me know what you get around to answering that question and we can go from there (I'll help... from the same time frame there had been 52recalls on the same OEM hoods, most were related to the latches). Also, why have car manufacturers not told the public about the testing they have done on AM parts, including hoods? Do you think it's because they have not? Of course they have... Chrysler's own reports performed 30mph crash tests using AM hoods. Want to know what they found?
Sorry, I'll give you just one more question... are AM parts legal? Same proposal... let me know what you want to answer this question.
BTW - you're article is 6 years old.
If you care to read the prior thread you know that no one here _wants_ to use AM parts... adjuster would _much_ rather use 100% new OEM parts. But let me ask the same question I asked in the prior thread... are you ready to pay a whole lot more for your insurance as a result? Of, feel free to answer that question as well.
But can we _please_ stay on topic of this thread so we don't have to accumulate 20 pages of the same information all over again.
The question was, should an insurance company use AM parts on a 2008 vehicle with 8,000 miles. I don't think anyone here thinks they should.
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 05:53 am Post Subject:
I will try to answer ALL of your questions:
are OEM parts perfect?
No. Sometimes they have small shipping dents and must be exchanged. On one occasion, in my experience, a Honda door was dimensionaly incorrect. The warranty claims that Keystone pays out to shops for defects is in my estimation is about 100 for every one OEM.
But without going into details let me ask... are OEM parts perfect? Let me know what you get around to answering that question and we can go from there (I'll help... from the same time frame there had been 52recalls on the same OEM hoods, most were related to the latches). Also, why have car manufacturers not told the public about the testing they have done on AM parts, including hoods? Do you think it's because they have not? Of course they have... Chrysler's own reports performed 30mph crash tests using AM hoods. Want to know what they found?
I assume they performed as well as an OEM?
Sorry, I'll give you just one more question... are AM parts legal? Same proposal... let me know what you want to answer this question.
Most are legal. Ford has gone after some manufacturers where they hold patents. If a copyrighted logo is stamped or embossed into the part it absolutely canot be duplicated legally. For instance you will not find a Mustang rear bumper cover that has Mustang embossed into it available as an aftermarket part.
are you ready to pay a whole lot more for your insurance as a result? Of, feel free to answer that question as well.
It depends on what kind of vehicle I am insuring. If its a 7 year old Hyundai then the answer is no. If its a three year old Lexus, then yes I would. I should have a choice between two kinds of polices. As it is now the consumer has no idea that AM parts will be substituted until a loss occurs. This is quite deceptive on the insurers part. This type of deception is not tolerated in any other industry I can think of. If the OEM's really wanted to do away with aftermarket parts it would be very easy. Just emboss or imprint copyrighted logos into all sheet metal parts. The OEM's want to sell new vehicles first and foremost. Parts can be more of a burden than a profit center for them.
The issue is that consumers should be told before a loss occurs that aftermarket parts will used so that the consumer can make an informed insurance purchase decision. Springing this on them and the repairer at the worst possible time , after they purchased the policy and then involved in an accident, is just wrong.
Add your comment