H.B. 119 Automotive Repair Business Amendments: transcript

Alright. Okay, thank you. Yeah, so this will be one 19. So I have HP 19 1 19 and four 19. My regret is I don't have two 19 or three 19, so I, I feel bad about that, but I'm happy about 9 1 19, the second sub, please. That will be what we're speaking to. So, uh, and, and I have, I have, so this deals with the automotive repair business. So imagine you have a, a brand new car and, uh, you got it insured and you're happy. I don't know if it's a Corvette or a Mustang. It's up to your, up to your choice in this fantasy, but you're, you're driving a brand new car and you got rear ended and, uh, that's not your fault. But, uh, so you take it in to get repaired and you've got insurance, so you assume that your car will get repaired back to what it was. However, what we're finding is that cars of today are not the same as cars. When Representative Christofferson and I were kids that were big metal boxes, and if somebody crashed it, we could fix the metal and be at least back to normal. In our new cars, we have a lot of sensors and radar and all of those things that in order for them to continue to work, they have to be repaired with the parts that are made to run the radar and the sensors. So it's gone from a cosmetic thing to a safety thing. And, uh, and what we have found is that there are not always, in fact, maybe seldom there is money set aside to bring our cars back to where we thought they would be. Uh, we are finding that, uh, that the auto body shops are instructed by the insurance companies that they need to buy. Uh, maybe a lesser part and, and I'll let the auto body shops give you the technical side of things, but, um, in my brain, I think of parts, you know, if you've got your Corvette or your Mustang, you have your part made by Ford or Chevy, but there might be a near equivalent, maybe a Kirkland brand, something, uh, that might be close or might not, or there might be a Tinker toy brand that might look the same but not function at all the same. Uh, and I use those because I'm not an auto body guy and I can't tell you all the different manufacturers. So, um, so what this bill does is there's, there's a couple of things. One is that when you purchase, when you purchase your insurance policy, you should know, have I purchased a policy that gives me OEM parts, that's the name, brand parts, or, you know, if I have a 2026 Buick, I want to get the OEM parts. If I have the 2005 Toyota Sequoia, which is actually my car, the 2005 Toyota Sequoia, maybe I'm okay with the non OEM aftermarket parts. Uh, but then when I have an accident, which I hope I, I pay for a lot of insurance, I hope never to use, but I seem to use it too frequently. But as I use my insurance, then I want to at least get the repair that I've paid for, whether it was OEM or equivalent. Um, but if I, if I didn't get the equivalent, then I should have some teeth to be able to say, this didn't, you didn't get my car back to where it should, and how do I, how do I get that repaired? So, um, I guess those, those in my brain are the major, are the major parts of this bill. And so I have, I have a guest online is, do, do you have someone, uh, Gavin online? He, he can speak to the insurance slice better than I can. And then, um, and then I guess, uh, Mr. Chair, uh, that we would conclude our presentation and, uh, and you could, we'll try to answer questions.

Good, good morning, Mr. Chairman, vice Chairman and representatives. Uh, my name is Gavin Magor and, uh, I am the director of, uh, ratings and research at Weiss Ratings, uh, based in Florida. Um, we are an independent ratings agency and we specialize in rating insurance companies and banks. And in a previous life, I had a incarnation working for a subsidiary of General Motors for 21 years. Uh, I, I think the easiest way to to look at this is to consider why, uh, insurance companies might, uh, want or not want to, uh, take part in what is being proposed, which is essentially, uh, to say that you should tell your policy holder that you are or are not going to be using OEM, uh, parts to repair their vehicles or indeed, um, similar parts that, that function exactly the same. Uh, the alternative is to use parts that simply just look right and they fit or partially fit. And the bottom line is that insurers will say that it is to do with cost, and that is understandable. Um, that cost, it may be an element that has to be taken into account. And if insurers were unprofitable overall, you could understand, uh, that this might be, uh, an issue. Uh, however, over the, uh, year, the last financial year that was published, which is, uh, 2024, the property casualty insurers that, uh, offered, uh, auto premiums, uh, in coverage, uh, in Utah, they made a, a total of, uh, of a significant amount of $28.4 billion. Now, this wasn't all in Utah, admittedly, however it is the, it shows the significant amount of money that they make. In fact, it is the most profitable year that they have, uh, shown since, uh, 2015. Uh, however, the, the issuer case should not be all about the money because they are able to generate this income that they need to, uh, to be able to meet a policy holder's demands. And a policy holder deserves to have a vehicle that is going to, uh, resemble both in function and form, uh, what they have paid for. They should be told whether they are going to be getting or should expect to get original equipment fitted to their vehicles to allow them to make that choice. And this is about choice. This is about if you want to have a premium that is low and they're going to use parts that are maybe not original equipment, that that should at least be disclosed. And this should not be a complicated issue. Uh, it should be very straightforward. It is, as I say, nothing to do with profitability of the insurers because they are perfectly capable of generating significant profits. But it is about choice, and it is about whether or not a policy holder would go with one insurer who will offer OEM equipment, even if they charge a little bit more. Or another insurer who might have a slightly lower premium, but says that they will use non OEM parts. That then is, uh, all that this is about, and I happy to answer any questions you have about the profitability of insurers. Um, but I can assure you that, uh, they are not struggling.

I can just say that. Uh, I, I get my insurance through, uh, through a, uh, a mutual association, Bear River, you know, I work for a rural electric co-op and I do my banking at a credit union. So I do my insurance through a mutual company and they offer, they offer two levels of premium. I could pay for the OEM replacement or I can pay for the equivalent parts. So some insurance companies are already offering that and let the market decide, and you can decide based on your own automobile, which one do you want to pay. But anyway, but either way, we want that to be a notice so that you know in advance what you've bought. So, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That concludes.

Thank you. And this, I, I don't know who wants to answer this question, but, uh, it might might be the sponsor. I had a case of friendly fire in my driveway a while ago where someone backed into one of our own cars and not wanting to deal with the insurance on it. I Uintah a body shop and they gave me a series of options on this would be the cost if it were OEM parts to replace it, and this would be the quality differential and this would be what it cost to, to, to do it very various different ways and as sometimes happens with insurance in healthcare and other places. Um, the insurance factor kind of muddies that. I, I think we don't necessarily have that matrix of quality versus price, uh, decision making before us. If, if I don't know what kind of a policy I have right now, and I were to let insurance make this decision for me, what's the, what's the default on this? Would I, would I even have a say in the matter of whether they used OEM parts or non OEM parts? Do you know?

Well, so my, and and I have, I am aware of several, um, auto Body Shop representatives with me here today. And so I can give you my guess or if the committee would indulge, we could offer one of them a chance to come give you the direct answer. Which one do you feel, Mr. Chair,

Sure. And I guess where I'm going with this question is if, if the default would be that they use parts that I don't want them to use, do I have an option as a, as a consumer to offer to pay more out of pocket or, or to get the parts that, that I want, if it's worth the price that they, that the price differential, I guess. Does that make sense? Yes. Okay. Thank you.

So your options would be to

Uh, I am Gerald Higgins. I'm with Higgins Body and Paint. Uh, I own three collision centers along the Wasatch front. And so your options at this point would be to either pay the, the difference from the cost of the alternative part up to the OEM part. Uh, you really don't have much leverage with the insurance because in your declaration page they've listed and identified, uh, that they have the option to use alternative parts. That that's typically the default.

If I don't know that I've paid extra for OEM parts, the default is that they, they tell me that they're, it's at their discretion,

Yes. They hide behind the declaration page and the wording that's written in the declaration page, uh, exercising the option to use alternative parts.

Okay. Thank you very much. So, So I guess then the short answer is you wouldn't know. So with this bill, would that, um, supersede those, uh, contracts then with your insurance?

Well, and, and this then, and, and we wouldn't, this, we, we don't try to retroactively change things, but with this bill, when you bought your insurance policy, you would, you would get that, uh, declaration upfront that this is either you've paid for OEM parts or you've paid for the alternative parts.

You. Tha Thank you Mr. Chair. I think I understand the OEM part issue, and I don't know if this relates to the OEM issue or not, but lines 99 to 1 0 4, uh, named where a named insured or person described in one A one. And that seems to address family members, people in the same household bring a claim. The available coverage of the policy may not be reduced or stepped down because permissive, uh, user driving a covered motor vehicle is at fault causing an accident or named insured of the person described, uh, as driving a covered mo motor vehicle is at fault causing an accident. Am I reading that right? If if someone in the household causes an accident, they can't adjust the policy rate or reduce the policy coverage?

Uh, yeah. Thank you. So what this does is if you've, uh, you've let one of your adult children or maybe your neighbor drive your car and, and if they get in an accident, then your policy is still the policy for whatever you've paid either OEM or non OEM. But they couldn't say, oh, well it wasn't you, it was your adult son or your neighbor, therefore, we're going to default to, even though you paid for OEM parts, we're gonna default to alternative parts. Okay? So this only relates to OEM or not OEM, it's not the overall policy. This, this only, this only relates to the part where, uh, there's a claim for an accident. And, and will that, uh, be repaired back to the policy that you have versus, well, it wasn't you, it was somebody you let drive your car, but it's still your car. So how does it get repaired?

Okay. I'm not, I'm not sure if I, if I understood, but, but this provision relates only to whether or not they use OEMP parts or not. 'cause the way I read it, it looks like it, it, it, it goes to the whole policy on whether they can raise rates or reduce coverage for the whole policy. I'm not seeing how it's related to just, oh, 'cause it's under the motor vehicle liability coverage section. Mm-hmm. It seems to relate to the entire policy charges and coverage. And

It, it would just require that the policy stay the same, whether it were you or somebody you delegated or gave permission to

Without regard to the OEM issue.

Yeah. In all, in all the aspects. Okay. So your car would be covered the same as your policy states and it wouldn't be stepped down. They say, well, okay, it's your car and you have this policy, but you weren't driving, therefore, we're not going to cover it at the same level. Okay. That's the step down. Provisioning.

May, may I ask one more question, Mr. Chair? I'm, I'm just curious how this, because it seems like most of the bill, what you're doing is related to the OEM issue, and this seems like a much broader issue that's different than the OEM issue.

Well, this, this, I, yeah. So this, this would be related because if, if, if you've been paying for these parts and, and somebody else that you gave permission, I'm not talking even if somebody stole your car, but you gave somebody permission and then the insurance company wouldn't say, well, it wasn't you driving, therefore, we're not gonna cover you and your car at the level that you've paid for. We're gonna cover your car at this lower level.

Alright. Okay. I guess we'll see if we get more clarification on the, as we get comment, but thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, question if, if the insurance companies can, um, decide, or, or however that decision is made to use aftermarket parts instead of the OEM, what is, what is keeping them in any policy using OEM parts instead of just going the cheaper route aftermarket all the time?

Well, so I think that's an excellent question, and I'll give you my best answer. And if you don't think I've answered it right, we'll, we'll ask the autobody folks. But, um, two, two things. One is that the notice that this is gonna require that you have either paid for OEM parts and therefore you should expect that. And then when they repair it, they have to give you notice about what they have used, um, or you paid for the alternative parts and that. But then there's also the terms in here that the parts have to be, if, if they're aftermarket non OEM parts, they have to be equivalent in, you know, form, function, fit, all of that. So there are, as you can imagine, in in the aftermarket parts, there are different levels of aftermarket parts. It's not all Mustang Kirkland or, but there's also the Tinker toy level. And I know that's a bad example, but I just, I don't know the names of the brands, but, um, but your, your comfort should be in the law saying that if they use aftermarket parts, it's because they noticed you, you, you knew that going in when you bought this policy. It's the oh five Toyota, not the 2026 Buick. Uh, so I, I paid for the aftermarket non OEM parts, but I also know that law says that they have to be equivalent in form fit and function and not just any old thing.

Okay. Uh, one more question, Mr. Chair for me. Sure. Um, so if we license and regulate autobody shops, um, to, to do the work correctly in the way that it should be done, what's the reason for adding an option for people to come at the insurance companies for a right of action?

Yeah, excellent question. And do you want me to give that or shall we ask the autobody shop?

Okay. We, we have several autobody shops here and, and I defer to their expertise in this area, but I have had a lot of conversations with them. They're very instructive. Perfect.

Hello, my name is Sam Plum and I'm here representing Alpine Auto Renovation. We're in South Salt Lake. Um, we're somewhat of a different shop. We, we cater to, we're very specialized German vehicles, Porsche, BMW, Audi, Lamborghini, Bentley. Um, your question again was, could you restate that one more time? The,

Yeah, so in Utah we regulate and license auto repair facilities and the people doing the work so that we know that the work is done professionally, accurately, all of that. So if, if we have regulation here to make sure the work is done, why are we adding a route to go and sue the insurance company who's not the ones actually doing the wrenching on the car?

So it, I agree that there obviously is an onus on behalf of the repair facilities to repair the car properly. In fact, I think that if the car is not repaired properly, then they obviously, the, the responsibility falls on the shop, not on the insurance carrier. However, to give you an example, let's say that you've got 48 parts on an estimate, doesn't matter what the car is, but 32 of them could be aftermarket or alternative parts. Those could all be from different parts of the country with providers, some of which exist, some of which don't. But ultimately, insurance companies are not looking to these parts to say, you know what, because I don't think that the, everybody wants to save money, including insurance companies. I don't think that that's a right, that should be taken away. But at the same time, they don't pick the part that is known to be a good provider or that is known to be a trustworthy vendor. They literally go to the cheapest part available and put that on the estimate without any regard for anything, not where it's coming from, not shipping times, not shipping costs, not return fees or, or restocking fees or any of those things. So it's, there's, or quality. 'cause none of these aftermarket parts are crash tested, none of them. So that means that nobody really knows how they respond in a crash. So when they look at these things, they aren't looking at anything, but, but price. So if you could get, if you could get a quality bumper for 1200 versus 1500 and they're saving that money, great. But if they could get one for $200 that comes wrapped around a cardboard tube that you could never use, they'll pick that one because it's the cheapest. It's not, it's never based on anything other than the lowest price and the lowest available part. So when you ask what's stopping them from using aftermarket parts all the time, availability, that's it. So then help me understand then when, when I used to work in, in auto parts, way back when, uh, service writers, that was kind of their, their job was to go over all these estimates and parts lists, everything with, with the, the, the client or whoever's having their car worked on. Do you guys have that still going on, or, or who's that person that's actually going over this with, with your client to say, I don't necessarily agree with this part? I think we need to look at something different. I mean, in, in this particular case, that person would be me and like, because of a different clientele or we may have a more affluent clientele, for instance, the price difference can be pretty alarming. So sure. Say it's on a Porsche take on and the the headlamp is $6,000 and they've put down a $900 lamp from a junkyard, I get to have the conversation with the guy saying, or a gal that look, do you want to cover that $5,000 difference? Which is a pretty exorbitant amount of money, right? If it was a couple hundred dollars, that may be reasonable, but to ask them if they would like to do that. But there are also mechanisms in which you can order the part show that it's substandard, return it, and in the past that would be justification for OEM. So there are mechanisms in place. However, some of the insurance carriers, I won't name names, we had a car recently that they had us order eight separate aftermarket alternative lamps for one car. We paid more in junkyard headlamps than they paid on the claim. So they, they don't have a system in place to make it fair either, both for the consumers, for the shops or whatever. They purely want that cost savings. And they don't have a mechanism for ensuring safety number one. But also number two, that there's an avenue that that is reasonable for getting the OEM parts if the parts that they have suggested do not work. And quite honestly, we will not use aftermarket parts. We will jump through the hurdles, we will go through those things. We do everything we can to advocate on the be on behalf of the best interest of the, the vehicle owner.

And can, can I point out one other thing that the, uh, that, uh, the line 2 66, I think it's where you're res referring where the motor vehicle owner has a right of action against the insurer. If they violated subsection two. Subsection two is the part that says, number one, that they've noticed you, that they're using aftermarket parts and then c which, and they're ensuring that they've got the aftermarket parts that are substantially equivalent as opposed to the ones in the cardboard tube or whatever. Sure.

Or to give, to give you an idea, like a manufacturer headlamp will typically have a two to three year warranty for if something goes wrong, any of the aftermarket components. You're lucky to get 30 days if you go to the insurance company to say, Hey, the part that you've had us purchase does not function properly. They send you to the vendor, they don't have anything to do. Well, you didn't, we didn't buy that part. You did, but we were forced to. Right? So I think that without something in place to keep them honest and to make sure that they're count accounting for things other than just the bottom line of the part still important. But if there's a spectrum, don't you think it would be better to pick something that saves money, but also accounts for safety and, um, quality versus just going for the cheapest possible part? Because most shops aren't gonna use that, but there are plenty of shops that will, and whether the customer's advised or not, who knows. But it's more so that for smaller shops and those things, they don't have the time to wait another 10 days, 14 days for the part to show up, show that it doesn't work. And I, I honestly, I can't imagine insurance companies are saving money by how much they spend in rental just going through that process.

Sure. And so I, I think, yeah, I, uh, I, I think, I think where I, I still have heartburn is that we're, we're allowing people to sue an insurance company. And I, I think anytime we allow that, we all see our, our policy rates go up, we all see, uh, things just get more expensive across the board. I'm all for people getting their cars fixed the way they need to be fixed. Um, but I know on my policy, I choose OEM parts, right? I, I pay a premium to, to have that. Um, if I, if I didn't want those OEM parts on my car, I could save money myself by just not paying for that and then going through that process myself, just kinda like what you're saying. Um, so I think that's kind of where I still have have some issues, but I, I appreciate your answers, so thank you.

Sorry. Hi, me again. Uh, this is, uh, just an opportunity for me to learn something. While we've got experts in the room. You had the option sponsor to purchase an OEM or non OEM policy. Were you able to price compare those two policies and can you tell me what that differential is on a 2005 Toyota Sequoia?

I think they told me it was like $15 a month difference.

Okay, thank you. If you had a 2026 Corvette, that difference might be bigger

In my mind. That's what it was. So, Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. So, so there are a lot of games that are played here. Uh, so OEM parts, they can be pretty high themselves. I mean, uh, you know, you sell a vehicle and then you go get it fixed or whatever. And it seems like the parts are so extremely high. Uh, but then also there are replacement parts that are equivalent in quality, but are a lot cheaper maybe. And then, like you say, there's another standard that's lower than, or that without standards, I guess another part that might be cheap but doesn't have the quality. And so if in your, in this bill, um, if you say, just notify me whether I'm getting OEM parts or not, if you're not getting the OEM OEM parts, then how do you know if you're getting a good quality non OEM part or, or one of the junk ones, you know, like the tinker to ones that you're talking about?

Yeah, so excellent question, and, and, and you, you raised another point in my brain, but, uh, that's why, that's why we put here that you're obligated as the insurer, if you're doing non OEM parts, you're obligated to pick the ones that are equivalent. And if, and if you picked, say the Tinker toy level, or I think, I think the auto body guys told me that they call it value. So value, I don't know, everybody likes value, but maybe you don't like tinker toys on your car, but, uh, if they pick the, the, the one that is not equivalent, but they're supposed to give you one that's equivalent, then that's when you have that right of action. But also the, you'll notice that in this bill, we did not specify that it had to be OEM parts because we didn't want to do that because as you said, there is kind of a, the, the market is the market. It's, we're trying to keep it as free market as possible because, uh, when you're shopping for these parts, uh, and, and they're looking for a part and they say, I need a part for whatever, a 2005 Toyota Sequoia, and, uh, and they're trying to find an aftermarket part, maybe they can't find one. Well, the OEM part says, look, I'll, I'll get you the OEM part for the same price as the aftermarket part. 'cause I can give that to you right now. And so you might get the OEM part for the price of the aftermarket part, uh, because that's some of that market pressure that exists. And we, we don't want to take that away at all. We want, we want to allow both to kind of compete and so that the aftermarket is there to keep the OEM parts may be reasonable, but, but we need that quality, otherwise you don't know that your car is safe, uh, after it's been fixed. So this bill just says, if you pick the non OEM path, you're gonna be, um, you're gonna get something equal, uh, quality. That, that's what we're trying to establish. We're not trying to say it has to be OEM 'cause there's, there's a good place for non OEM parts. Let's have some competition, but let's keep those parts in the equivalent level and not in the, the non equivalent value level

One. So we have another auto Did did you wanna address

That story? No, I, I represent, uh, my name is Richard Seaman. I represent, uh, Salt Lake, valley Auto Group and Sky Auto Group. Um, also the OM manufacturers as well too today. Um, what I would like to speak to as park quality, um, and part safety really, uh, the number one question here is, is your safety. Um, about a month ago, um, I was outta state on vacation with my daughter, my 17-year-old daughter. We were in a vehicle. Um, I was involved in a pretty significant rear end collision. Um, we both walked away from that because that was a fairly new car. Um, all of the safety features built into that, the, the rear of that vehicle was completely crushed and destroyed. That car will never drive on the road again. Uh, we walked away that night with zero injuries. Um, what we see typically nowadays, um, based on, on current industry practices and insurance practices, is they only do care, as my colleagues have stated. And, and, uh, Representative Jack has stated, seems like the insurance companies care about price more than safety in a lot of these aspects. Um, they care about saving as much as they possibly can and about getting the car back on the road as fast as they can so they don't have to pay for rental car fees and such. Um, one of the, the things that we offer too, and almost every manufacturer offers us now, um, with the exception to some of the foreign brands, is, uh, what we call price match or conquest, price matching, um, where we offer the manufacturers actually supplement, um, the dealers and I represent a dealer group to dealer groups. Um, they actually supplement the dealers to sell the OEM part at a lower price competitive with the aftermarket parts LKQ parts. The used parts in a lot of cases too, where you're, you're putting a car part on your vehicle that's been in a junky yard for six months because it was wrecked on a vehicle in Iowa or Indiana or Nebraska or somewhere else, and they wanna put it on your car to repair your car. That who knows what that, uh, part has been exposed to in elements. Um, outside elements. Inside elements could have rust on. It may not function as properly designed. If they put a used airbag in your car, um, that airbag may not go off. There may be rust and corrosion on the inside of that airbag because the vehicle sat open to the elements for three months. Um, the OEM manufacturers strive by spending tens of billions, if not hundreds of billions of dollars a year by doing several things. The first thing they do is they do a, a ton of research crash testing, um, to make sure that those vehicles perform exactly as, as designed. Um, your safety is one of the top priorities for every, almost every OEM manufacturer that I can think of. Um, I walked away from a vehicle accident a month ago. Okay, that vehicle is destroyed without the safety features built in there. They absolutely couldn't, that would may not have happened. Okay. Um, the aftermarket parts are not as regulated as the OEM parts are. They simply just are not. Alright,

Thanks. We, we have a time limit here, so we just wanna keep our answers, uh, pretty succinct. But, uh, uh, the other question I had was, um, if, if you don't have a right of action, what, uh, are there other remedies that you can take to, to make it right?

Well, we, we Were worried about that because, uh, you, you can go through, uh, say the division of consumer protection and, and make a complaint, but you may or may not feel like you've gotten satisfaction there or you've got your problem solved. So that's why we've added this here, and it only kicks in if they have violated what they told you they were going to do.

Thank you. Let's see. Is that on? Yes, I'll thank you. Chair Christofferson and committee members. My name is Dave Callis. I represent the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and have been asked to give some, uh, comments here on this issue. And thanks to Representative Jack for, uh, speaking with us. Um, a couple, uh, things to talk about first. Um, our concern with the bill is, it basically is, is it's similar to a ban on or could be on non OEM parts. And that's a concern for us currently, if you sign up for an insurance policy, the, in the policy documents, it describes parts that can be used. And so you're choosing a policy that can use OEM or non OEM or other parts if you like. Uh, was stated before, if you have a, a new shiny corvette and you only want the Corvette OEM part on there, you can already purchase. The rider has been, as it has been talked about. Um, those vary in price, but the price suggested is similar to what we've seen for OEM riders. So if, if that's what you want to ensure you get is only OEM, that is an option that's available. Um, the, um, on, on the line, about 2 63 down on the bill, ensuring the fitness on quality function fit finish performance weight and metal hardness might be really a, an impossibility for insurer. We, we pay to fix a vehicle. We don't go through and test in the lab and have experiments. We're, we're relying on the manufacturers of parts and their specifications. And so if those specifications work and they say, Hey, this part it can be used on this vehicle, that's what we rely on. Our, our business is to pay for that repair, not to test those products. So having a private right of action against the insurance company who relied on the specifications of a aftermarket part that says it works on this vehicle is problematic. Um, and we might not be able to comply with that provision. Um, again, customers are choosing, do they want a rider or do they not want the rider on there already? So that, that's a decision they're making upfront. Really, as I've spoken with some of the insurance, uh, carriers on this issue, what they have said is time is kind of what's of the essence in these repairs. Oftentimes it's the time is more expensive than the parts. So they want, uh, the flexibility to use a, maybe it's an OEM part is available, but, uh, aftermarket or a third party part is on back order. They'd rather use an OEM part than pay for a rental car for a month or two months while they wait for something to be shipped. So they're considering both the time and the, and the actual part when they're looking at these repair issues.

So, so does the, uh, does the insurance company, uh, just authorize the cheapest part? They, or do they allow, or do they allow the, uh, uh, service, um, the, the one that's the mechanic that's servicing that to, to, to decide which is the best part for it?

I don't know on the mechanic level what their, what their conversations they have with them. And we've got others here that can comment that can probably clarify that. What they've told me is that they're cons when they make those decisions, they're considering both time of repair and cost of parts. So they're considering both of those in their, in the decision making process. But we have others that could maybe answer that question a little better in terms of the interaction they're having on that.

I was just wondering if the insurance company just looked at the cheapest part, not the quality.

Uh, I don't, again, they're not just looking at cheapest part, they're looking at multiple factors, like how long is the rental car, uh, going to be needed for that repair? The rental, if you have a a a a part that's $200 and a part, an OEM part that's $500, but you need a rental car for three weeks, that rental car is far more expensive than the difference in the parts that you're authorizing. So it's a, it's a, a whole list of considerations they're giving. And lastly, again, let me just say the right of action is a big problem because the insurance companies pay for repairs. They don't test metal hardness, they don't, they rely on manufacturers and specifications. They're given that those parts will work, so, okay. Okay.

Committee chair, uh, members of the committee. Good morning. My name is Catalina Ja Peria. I represent LKQ Corporation. We are a leading global provider of aftermarket parts. We have three facilities here in the state of Utah, and we offer safe and affordable aftermarket recycle, refurbished remanufacture and specialty auto parts.

Thank you. Is that better? Yeah. Yeah. So LKQ is testifying in opposition to house bill one 19. Uh, this bill seeks to restrict, uh, the use of aftermarket crash parts. The build changes standards, statutory definitions, mandates misleading disclosure statements that are discriminatory against the aftermarket parts industry. And of course, uh, the private right of action is of major concern to our company, uh, house Bill one 19 unfairly close into question the reliability of aftermarket crash parts. Uh, the proposed disclosure statements act as a disguised intimidation tactic. It is designed to persuade consumers with the false notion that aftermarket parts are inferior to their more expensive OEM um, counterparts. Uh, while LKQ supports a consumer's right to know which parts are used in their repairs, uh, this information should be delivered through factual, standardized, and corroborated statements. Uh, the bill instead is using legislative language that deviates from standard, uh, state statutes. We haven't seen any of these, uh, adjectives added in any other states, and those are definitely not industry terms that we have seen in different, um, estimates. Uh, we believe that the safety and performance of aftermarket parts is not even questionable. Uh, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Institute Institute for Highway Safety have examined the safety of aftermarket parts several time during the past 30 years, arriving to the same conclusion that crash parts, whether aftermarket or OEM, are irrelevant to, uh, motor vehicle safety. Uh, these parts aftermarket parts OEM parts that are crash parts are cosmetic in nature, and they're not responsible for safeguarding the occupants in a crash, uh, without scientific or real world evidence to back the claims that aftermarket parts are unsafe. We just believe that this, uh, legislation is just monopolistic in nature. They're trying to just restrict consumer choice, and we really wanna make sure that this is not a bill that would increase insurance premiums and auto repair costs. For families that are already struggling with the very difficult economic times. Aftermarket parts are usually 25 to 50% lower in price comparable to OEM parts, and we know that there is already an option in the marketplace. Consumers are not deceived. They can select the u uh, the, the insurance premium that they would like to, um, select. It's all, you know, consumer choice. So for affordability re reasons, consumers should have the option to select an OEM parts premium or an aftermarket aftermarket parts premium.

To wrap it up, uh, the current law already has a, has a disclosure statement so consumers know, uh, on the estimate if they are, uh, having their auto repair shop. Can I just post that?

So, uh, the body shops already have at their disposal, uh, the repair, uh, estimate and the consumers have specified if the use of the parts are gonna be OEM or aftermarket parts, that's already codified and there's no reason to include any more discriminatory disclosure statements. Thank you

Question? I Yes, a question. I actually two questions. Uh, so the first question is, can you just explain to us how it is that you are able to sell the same quality part at a lower price? Is it just monopoly that Mopar is charging more or is it just that you have a way of producing it cheaper? Or how, how is it, how are you able to sell it for less?

Yeah. Um, chair and representative, thank you so much for that question. And that is just a manufacturing process. Sometimes this, these parts are manufacture in the same facility with the same quality, the same standards for performance and fit third, like kind and quality. They just come out of the same assembly line and sometimes they're, uh, marketed for the, uh, OEM brand. So you would have a four or a Honda, uh, OEM part, but you would have the same equivalent, uh, manufacturer part just coming out of the assembly line with a generic brand. So

That, that didn't explain how you were able to sell it for less.

Well there, it, it, it's just this, the, the, the market how it works and, you know, when you go to the store and you purchase the store brand and also,

Well, can, can we just say that the OEM people are upcharging? Is that fair?

Yeah, absolutely. Uh, yeah. In, in, in, in all regard, we know how the marketplace works and of course, if you purchase the brand name, you would, you would pay you, you sometimes, I'm sorry, uh, pay for the brand name, but you're getting the same equivalent, uh, product that is branded with a different name. Uh, I always use the store brand. Uh, example, when you go to Costco or you know, any of your stores, those products are manufacture in the same facility. Yeah. I they're paying, paying the, the additional, uh, markup price just because you're buying the brand name.

Yeah. I will tell you, I used to work for Smuckers. Mm-hmm. We produced Smucker's brand Strawberry Jam, and we produced store brand SM right. Strawberry Jam. Uh, but my other question if I may, Mr. Chair, is there's been a question about supply chain. So if, if we are going to make a move that says more of these cars have to be fixed using OEM parts, is the supply chain sufficient to even deliver that number of parts? Would, would cars be waiting for weeks or possibly months waiting for the parts to come in?

Um, the answer is yes. That would be a major logistical problem that is already in place. Uh, time and, and, and availability is already a situation for repair shops to have OEM parts deliver. And sometimes rural communities would have a major, major logistical problem trying to get OEM parts, uh, when aftermarket parts that are equivalent in kin and quality are available for a much less, uh, price. So logistically would be a major concern. And then for us, uh, more specifically is the, the price. Thank you

Okay. Um, I just have a couple other things to add. If we, um, Mike Sontag, Mike Sontag with A-P-C-I-A, American Property and Casualty Insurance Association, and also Bear River Insurance. So I just have a couple of things to add to Dave's testimony. Um, in our deck page, in our policy, it says we will use like kind and quality parts to repair anything less is not part of the contract. If we repaired a demand to repair something less than like kind and quality, which by definition is up to standards of OEM parts, then we would be in breach of contract. And if we're in breach of contract, thereby that already has its inherent, right? Also we have a lot of, uh, penalties options. If we've a consumer feels, uh, unfairly treated, they can complain to the insurance department, uh, and then market conduct can be done. And that's a very thorough audit of what we're doing in the market. So there are currently exists ways to punish insurance companies that consumers might feel like are being treated unfairly. Um, it also seems that maybe the purpose of this is to diminish confidence in non OEM parts. And, uh, if we had to disclose up front, we're not repairing you with OEM parts, then people say, oh, well how bad are the other parts? Well, they're just as good in our experience. And, um, let's see, the supply chain ta Jay, uh, Dave talked about the supply chain issue. Our, Our 15 seconds, our experience is that time rental cars are exceeding the cost of repairs. So if time's an issue, whichever part's available, that is the part that we use to repair it quickly.

Uh, thank you very much for the time. I appreciate the opportunity to, to meet before you. My name is Matt Child, I represent the Utah Independent Insurance agents in the state of Utah. Uh, we would speak out in opposition to this bill for a couple reasons. Uh, those that have already been made by Mike and, and Dave, but also for a couple other things. One, the, um, the, the right of action could also be broadly interpreted to come against an agent if they didn't disclose this or talk to the client about options for OEM versus aftermarket parts. Um, in my 33 years of insurance experience, an insurance policy and auto policy is designed to be an indemnity policy or to restore the client back to the condition they were prior to the accident. Um, that obligation gets put upon the insurance, uh, company to make sure that happens. But they also trust and work with partnership with the body shops to make sure that repair is done. And they will often guarantee those repairs in conjunction with the body shops to make sure that restoration to prior to accident condition has been done. That can be done with aftermarket parts or with OEM parts, uh, sometimes regarding supply chain. The problem with new vehicles is there might not be a robust aftermarket opportunity. There's just OEM parts available 'cause it's a brand new car. But as we get into, as we've brought it up multiple times, a 2005 Toyota Sequoia, the OEM may not still be producing replacement parts for a vehicle that's 20 years old. And the only option is OEM, uh, excuse me, aftermarket parts. And those aftermarket parts are viewed to be substantially similar like kind and quality to the OEM parts. And so that for that reason, we would oppose the bill. Additionally, if the bill were to, to move forward, we have real concerns about the effective date and how that impacts disclosure. The effective date being made, many policies are six to 12 months and so that would need to be delayed as far as disclosure of how this works and, uh, discussion with the client because that would need to burn into the policies as they come on in their effective date or renewal date. Thank you very much for your time.

My name is Corey Stanger. I represent Alpine Body Shop in Ogden, Utah.

Uh, my name's Corey Stanger. I represent Alpine Body Shop in Ogden, Utah. Previously the president of the Utah Auto Body Association and a member of the Small Business Compliance Advisory Board with the Department of Environmental Quality. Um, I'm here in support of the bill. Uh, I manage a, a shop Alpine body shop and I write estimates and I interact with insurance companies on a regular basis and consumers and, and strive to teach consumers about the differences between OEM and aftermarket parts. Uh, their qualities and disadvantages. Um, currently in the market, consumers are unaware of those disadvantages. And, and while it is true, there are occasionally, uh, insurers who offer policies for OEM endorsement, uh, it's overwhelmingly true that most consumers don't understand what their options are. This bill aims to, um, put that information at the forefront of insurers recommending, uh, in the policy purchasing stages, uh, that they have options to OEM parts or aftermarket parts. Um, this is a, this, this is a contract, right? A policy is a contract between a consumer and an insurance company. And they should have those options and they should be disclosed up front so they know what they have, uh, during a repair procedure. What happens when there's not a contract? 50% of the repairs, uh, the claims that arise are from a third party claimant who have no contract or obligation. It's important to understand that those people should be protected because of language like this, where otherwise they're not being protected because of provisions of a policy. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

Again, my name is, uh, Gerald Higgins from Higgins Body and Paint, and I'm thankful for the opportunity to be here today. Uh, I am a strong advocate of the bill. Uh, I believe in consumer protection, consumer transparency. And to set that example, I'd like to share and you guys invite everybody to remember the last time they purchased a vehicle, they were proud of their purchase. Uh, they reached out to their insurance carrier to discuss their insurance needs. They discussed the liability limits. Uh, traditionally the agent discusses the, uh, collision coverage, uh, comprehensive coverage and what your deductible amounts will be. They may or may not have discussed your rental car options, towing options. Has that been two minutes already? Little

Going. So anyway, what happens a couple weeks later, you receive your declaration page and it looks at that declaration page and it's clearly identified. You may or may not look to your declaration page, you grab your insurance card and you go about normal life. You get involved in an accident and that's when you find out what was included in your declaration page. It wasn't very transparent. That's when you're disclosed that they have the right to use alternative parts in that repair process. And, and it's a real shock to everyone. 'cause at that point it's too late. They weren't educated about a choice, the freedom of choice to protect their investment. And so I'm a big advocate that we do need to have transparency, especially on the front side of a policy to protect that investment, to know what you got. There is a place, and I need to set the record straight, I am a supporter of aftermarket and alternative parts. However, I think it's been widely misused and abused in our industry and the consumer is not aware of, of those problems.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to hold.

Sure. It sounds like, um, there are parts of this bill that I think we all agree on, but it might need a little bit more tweaking in order to, um, to make it to prime time. So I'd like to give the sponsor the opportunity to work on some of the concerns that he's heard from, from the committee and from the public and get it to a better place.

Uh, I have a, I have a substitute motion. I don't mind that motion, but the substitute motion would be to remove sections, um, three and four on the, uh, right. Of action. And the reason I like that is because I, um, I like the notification so that people know what they're getting, but it may be a little strong on the right of action. So that's, that's just a, an option to throw out.

Okay. So on, on the substitute motion. So striking three and four about the private right of action and, uh, and awarding the actual damages, those, those two sections,

Okay. So it just pretty much strikes three and four. Um, I think that would preserve the bulk of the bill. Right. If that, if that solves the concerns of the committee, we, I would, I would be agreeable to that.

You, I'm, I'm happy to Withdraw my motion.

Uh, I'll support that. And if I can just quickly say why I think this is important. I had three questions going into this. The first was, are there differentiated pro products for consumers who want different levels of, of coverage? And the answer seems to be, yes, you could buy a rider or buy a policy that is obviously covering one or the other. Are there existing remedies for consumers who feel like they didn't get the coverage and in service that they, that they paid for? I believe between consumer protection and insurance, uh, protection that exists. So the third and final question that I had was, do consumers understand what they're buying at the time that they buy it? And, uh, and I, I still feel like this substitute motion preserves, um, its intention to create a consumer awareness at the time. So I support this.

Thank you Mr. Chair. I thank you to the sponsor. I think it's important work that you've done here on the consumer protection side. And I, I think I would support the motion as well. I think it, it strikes the right balance.

So I, I still have a problem in lines 2 63 to 2 65. I don't know how an insurer is going to ensure that anything actually works. I mean, that's, that's a manufacturer thing they can say, in fact, they can't even ensure that OEM parts are going to work. Right? They can't, they can't, they can't ensure that if they put a genuine factory part in there, that it is going to have the equivalent quality fix, whatever. It, it, they just don't know. And so, I, I don't know how in theory that is actually going to work because it's, it is a problem for these stuff.

I, I'll just be a no on the motion.

Thank you. Just to go back to, uh, representative Oland's question, do customers know? And I can tell you I've bought auto insurance now for 50 years, and I, and I never understood that, uh, I had a choice in what I was getting for repair parts until this bill. And so I didn't even my own insurance company, I didn't know I could pay for a rider to, to get OEM parts. So I think there's more to be done to educate us as customers, but we haven't attempted to do that here. We've only attempted to let the market kind of choose, but put guardrails that whatever we get, OEM, non OEM, that they're equivalent. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Okay. Thank you. I think this helps to get some transparency, but not be too draconian at, at first. I mean, if we find out there's problems down the road, we can tweak it. So this will get us started. I think so. I appreciate that. So that ends my summary.

Thank you. Thank You, Mr. Chair.

Yes, please. Uh, Mr. Chair, I'd like to move. Fifth sub.

Okay, thank you. So, uh, you'll notice this is not a very long bill. What, what we've done here is essentially two things. Uh, one, oh, and I guess I ought to give you the reason why and, and introduce, uh, my, my co-presenter here. His name is, uh, Gerald, and he's, uh, works, he owns a, a set of autobody shops. And so we're talking about, uh, autobody repair and the needs to have that done right. Uh, maybe some of you are, yeah, fifth sub. Some of you are not as old as me, but some might be. And remember in the days when, when I was a teenager driving a 65 Mercury and, uh, you know, it was a 400 cubic inch V eight, and it was very nice. And if, and if I got a dent in the fender, I could pull it out. Or worst case I could go to the junkyard and find another one and replace it. But, uh, but now we have sensors. If you go to my 2025 Buick, uh, there's sensors on the front. There's sensors on the back. And if, and if I scrape a fender on a, on a post, then, uh, those, those sensors may or may not work when, when we get done. And so some of that is attributable to the parts that are used. And when you buy your, your policy, uh, that's when you determine what kind of replacement parts you would get. If you got crashed into, you can, uh, you could pay a premium for some, some insurance companies offer you to get a rider to get, uh, original OEM parts so that you got the same name brand, you know, Buick Parts, or, uh, if you have an older, like my 2005 Toyota Sequoia, and you're thinking, well, I could pay less for insurance and not have that rider, and I could use an, an equivalent to an OEM an aftermarket non OEM park. Anyway. So what this bill does now, giving you that background, what this bill does is it simply says that when you buy the policy, you should get notice about which one of those you're getting. And when you renew, you should get notice. And then when you get the, when you're getting the repair, you should get notice about which parts you got. And then, um, and then what was the other thing? Uh oh, and then the other thing is what, what counts as, uh, as non OEM parts? Uh, it just says that the parts on your vehicle are made by a manufacturer other than the original manufacturer are required to be at least equivalent and kind and quality in terms of fit, quality, and performance. Those were words that we went through several iterations in the bill, trying to get the words exactly like, uh, the part manufacturers are used to seeing in other states. And so, uh, uh, that's, that's my basic presentation, Mr. Chair. It's all right. I would have Gerald to give him a couple of minutes of Yeah, if you wouldn't mind identifying who you are, who you represent.

Uh, good evening. My name is Gerald Higgins. I own, uh, Higgins Body and Paint. Uh, we have three collision centers along the Wasatch Front. Uh, I am here today as a firm advocate of HB one 19. In my daily work, I witness the surprise gap firsthand. It is the moment of realization, usually after an accident where an insured individual discovers their coverage doesn't actually align with their expectations. HB one 19 closes that gap through transparency at the point of application. By documenting policy benefits clearly from day one, we replace assumptions with certainty. Furthermore, the requirement for renewal notices create a virtual check-in. It empowers the ensure to verify that their coverage still matches what their reality is. We recognize the right part choice of personal choice. A new vehicle equipped with complex eight s sensors requires different repair strategies than an older work truck. However, the common denominator must always be safety, and the customer should have a choice. The person paying the premium should be the one deciding the level of protection that is best for their family and for the vehicle. Whether it is a high tech commuter car or a seasoned vehicle, safety standards are non-negotiable. I believe in full transparency from the start. HB one 19 isn't just about policy change. It is a cohesive, fair agreement that balances the needs of all consumers, parts, suppliers, insurance, and the repair facilities alike. I encourage each of you to support the bill and bring clarity back to the automobile industry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That would Conclude our presentation.

Hello, Senate. Thank you for this opportunity. I would like to speak in favor of this bill. Um, I'm Travis Olson. I own AF Collision, as well as I'm the Vice President of the Mountain States Collision Repair Association, which I'm speaking on behalf of as well. Um, I wanna share two stories that just recently happened since we, um, proposed this bill a couple of weeks ago in, uh, the house that has, has just recently, uh, in, in the matter of a two weeks happened. Um, I had one customer recently that brought in their brand new 2026 vehicle with 2000 miles on it. Uh, certain insurance company would not replace their parts with OEM parts. They wanted to use aftermarket parts. I would ask you that if that was your brand new vehicle that you spent, uh, thousands and thousands of dollars on, if you would be okay with that. Their policy was such that anything over 2000 miles got aftermarket parts, um, which is a lower grade quality versus OEM parts. Um, they were off by 500 miles and they would not cover to go to factory parts. And this customer did not know this. Um, second, uh, I

Hello, I am Brianne Beckstrom. I am a member of the Rocky Mountain Collision Repair Association. But more importantly, for decades, my family has been stakeholders in the automotive collision repair industry. Running a business has been built on a simple promise taking care of our neighbors. We have spent our professional pursuits advocating for consumers because I've seen firsthand how much a vehicle means to a family. It's more than just a car. It is their safety and their second largest investment house, bill one 19 is a natural extension of that advocacy. It's about consumer education right now. The repair process can be clouded by complex paperwork and hidden details. This bill helps mandate transparent, easy to read disclosures. It ensures that every Utah is fully informed about the parts and standards used to repair their vehicle before the work even begins. When the consumer is educated and the insurance policy is clear, it allows the body shop to get back to what it does best, restoring vehicles to their pre-accident condition. We want our technicians to focus on craftsmanship, safety quality, without any guesswork. Consumers deserve to know what parts are included and what auto, what insurance happens before the accident. This isn't just a bill, it is our commitment to excellence and honesty. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Okay. I'll make, I'll make a motion. Let's see, where are we at here? It's uh, Fifth sub. Yeah, fifth Sub. Okay. Well, I'll make a motion that we delete entitled and body four sub house bill one 19. Replace it with fifth sub house bill.

Thank you. I'll Waive, I'll waive as well.

Yes. I move that that bill passed with a favorable recommendation.

Thank you. I'll wa Senator Ipson. That's a good bill.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Pro tem, uh, motion to circle.

Yes. Thank you. We had, uh, we had a good meeting this morning with all of the, uh, with all of the interested parties. And so we are drafting a sub that I will bring back as soon as we have that.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would like to move the adoption of the fourth substitute of HB one 19.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to move the adoption of the fourth sub of HB one 19.

Uh, yes please. What what this does is it brings the language in the bill into a place where both sides could agree that we were in a good place. And so this fourth sub was what we negotiated in the couple of days since I last circled this bill. And so with that, I would move that the body adopt that so I can tell you about how good the bill is.

Thank you. I'll waive. Okay. Summation has been waived.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. HB one 19 seeks to solve a problem that's kind of a modern problem with modern vehicles. When, when I was a kid and drove a 64 mercury, uh, if you got in a crash or if you had a dent, you were dealing with sheet metal and maybe you could take it to a shop and they could work the kinks out or get you a replacement part. Or we used to go down to the junk yard. They don't call it that anymore 'cause that's not politically correct. But we called it a junkyard and you could get a fender off of a similar car that wasn't crashed on that side and you could take that off and put it on. Anyway, on new cars. Now there are sensors and cameras and radar and they're built in on front and sides and back. And it's a wonderful thing. I love driving up the freeway and my 2025 Buick and it almost drives itself. Not quite. But the problem with all of this new high tech automobile is that if you get a scrape on your fender or if you have a crash on the bumper, all of those sensors get broken. They get out of alignment and you can no longer just kind of Iron out the kinks in the fender or replace the bumper. It has to be replaced properly and correctly. The problem comes when you go to make an insurance claim. You may find out that your insurance doesn't cover all of the original kind of parts that you thought you had and you may not have realized that your insurance did or did not cover that. I've been buying car insurance for about 50 years and I only learned that that was an option, uh, when I ran this bill. And so in in the parts in the replacement parts business, there are multiple levels of kinds of parts. And in the bill you'll see all the technical language and that's also new stuff I learned. There's the OEM parts that are made that have the stamp right on it from Ford or Chevy or whatever brand. Then there's the non OEM parts that are equivalent and maybe even made in the exact same factory as the brand name parts, but they can sell for less because they don't have the logo on it. Then there is also a line of parts called value parts, which may or may not have the exact same form fit and function of your OEM or equivalent parts. And so which ones do you get in your car repair may determine now the safety and function of the car that you depend on to drive, you know, your kids or grandkids. So what this bill does now in its fourth sub iteration is it requires that when you purchase your insurance policy, that the insurance company gives you notice of what kind of replacement parts you have signed up for. Clearly getting non OEM parts is cheaper than OEM parts. Uh, getting value parts is even cheaper than that. But which, which one are you getting? You should know when you buy the policy. Also, we put when you renew your policy, 'cause most of us already have a policy, so when's our next chance to learn what we have is at our renewal? And then third, also, uh, you should get notice when you go to get a repair that your policy covered this kind of parts and therefore this is the kind you're getting. And then also the fourth thing that this bill does is it clarifies that, and you can read the words, but, uh, and these are industry standard words and this took us a bit of back and forth to make sure we got the exact industry standard words, but just that the non OEM parts used are equivalent and likekind quality, safety, fit and performance as the OEM parts would've been had you got those parts. So sorry, that was a seven minute presentation. Uh, somebody else could have done it in three. But, uh, that, uh, that is what the bill does. Mr. Speaker. And with that, I would conclude my presentation.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I am not inclined to believe that it is the state's role to be involved in this. Rather, I would prefer that insurances, um, do this on a voluntary basis on their own and let the free market decide on that. So I'll be a no on this. Thank you.

You Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

Yes, Mr. Speaker? Jack, will you yield? Yes sir, I Would.

So, uh, your car from the sixties, did it have three on the tree?

Yes. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it did. Thank you.

How many of your high school buddies did it take to push start that car?

It, it took about three of us. It was pretty heavy. Mr. Speaker,

It sounds like a real similar car to what I had in the, in high school.

Thank you. Oh, that was loud. Thank you Mr. Speaker. I was in support of this bill. Uh, last May. I was, uh, plowed into this. My microphone has some issues. I guess I was plowed into on a roundabout from an unlicensed driver in my Explorer st. And when they repaired it, uh, I ended up with some value parts unaware of that. And so I am in support of this bill and I think we should all vote for it. Thank you Representative Shepherd.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I think it's been a good conversation, so I encourage everyone's support. Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like to move the adoption of the fourth sub of HB one 19.

Uh, yes please. What what this does is it brings the language in the bill into a place where both sides could agree that we were in a good place. And so this fourth sub was what we negotiated in the couple of days since I last circled this bill. And so with that, I would move that the body adopt that so I can tell you about how good the bill is.

Thank you. I'll waive. Okay. Summation has been waived.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. HB one 19 seeks to solve a problem that's kind of a modern problem with modern vehicles. When, when I was a kid and drove a 64 mercury, uh, if you got in a crash or if you had a dent, you were dealing with sheet metal and maybe you could take it to a shop and they could work the kinks out or get you a replacement part. Or we used to go down to the junk yard. They don't call it that anymore 'cause that's not politically correct. But we called it a junkyard and you could get a fender off of a similar car that wasn't crashed on that side and you could take that off and put it on. Anyway, on new cars. Now there are sensors and cameras and radar and they're built in on front and sides and back. And it's a wonderful thing. I love driving up the freeway and my 2025 Buick and it almost drives itself. Not quite. But the problem with all of this new high tech automobile is that if you get a scrape on your fender or if you have a crash on the bumper, all of those sensors get broken. They get out of alignment and you can no longer just kind of Iron out the kinks in the fender or replace the bumper. It has to be replaced properly and correctly. The problem comes when you go to make an insurance claim. You may find out that your insurance doesn't cover all of the original kind of parts that you thought you had and you may not have realized that your insurance did or did not cover that. I've been buying car insurance for about 50 years and I only learned that that was an option, uh, when I ran this bill. And so in in the parts in the replacement parts business, there are multiple levels of kinds of parts. And in the bill you'll see all the technical language and that's also new stuff I learned. There's the OEM parts that are made that have the stamp right on it from Ford or Chevy or whatever brand. Then there's the non OEM parts that are equivalent and maybe even made in the exact same factory as the brand name parts, but they can sell for less because they don't have the logo on it. Then there is also a line of parts called value parts, which may or may not have the exact same form fit and function of your OEM or equivalent parts. And so which ones do you get in your car repair may determine now the safety and function of the car that you depend on to drive, you know, your kids or grandkids. So what this bill does now in its fourth sub iteration is it requires that when you purchase your insurance policy, that the insurance company gives you notice of what kind of replacement parts you have signed up for. Clearly getting non OEM parts is cheaper than OEM parts. Uh, getting value parts is even cheaper than that. But which, which one are you getting? You should know when you buy the policy. Also, we put when you renew your policy, 'cause most of us already have a policy, so when's our next chance to learn what we have is at our renewal? And then third, also, uh, you should get notice when you go to get a repair that your policy covered this kind of parts and therefore this is the kind you're getting. And then also the fourth thing that this bill does is it clarifies that, and you can read the words, but, uh, and these are industry standard words and this took us a bit of back and forth to make sure we got the exact industry standard words, but just that the non OEM parts used are equivalent and likekind quality, safety, fit and performance as the OEM parts would've been had you got those parts. So sorry, that was a seven minute presentation. Uh, somebody else could have done it in three. But, uh, that, uh, that is what the bill does. Mr. Speaker. And with that, I would conclude my presentation.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I am not inclined to believe that it is the state's role to be involved in this. Rather, I would prefer that insurances, um, do this on a voluntary basis on their own and let the free market decide on that. So I'll be a no on this. Thank you.

You Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield?

Yes, Mr. Speaker? Jack, will you yield? Yes sir, I Would.

So, uh, your car from the sixties, did it have three on the tree?

Yes. In fact, Mr. Speaker, it did. Thank you.

How many of your high school buddies did it take to push start that car?

It, it took about three of us. It was pretty heavy. Mr. Speaker,

It sounds like a real similar car to what I had in the, in high school.

Thank you. Oh, that was loud. Thank you Mr. Speaker. I was in support of this bill. Uh, last May. I was, uh, plowed into this. My microphone has some issues. I guess I was plowed into on a roundabout from an unlicensed driver in my Explorer st. And when they repaired it, uh, I ended up with some value parts unaware of that. And so I am in support of this bill and I think we should all vote for it.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I think it's been a good conversation, so I encourage everyone's support. Thank you.

Amendment number one in my name and it changes the word equal to equivalent. That's all it does.

So this bill amends provisions relating to automotive repairs when an automobile's in a crash body shops have several options and the insurance has several options to to pay it. What this bill does is requires that the insurance company use equivalent parts when they build the car back together. With that, I'm open for questions.

I mo I make a motion that fifth substitute house bill one 19 as amended under suspension of the rules pass.

Senator Vickers Baldy Blue in B Brammer bus Comore es Camia Fillmore Grover Harper Hankins Ipson Aye. Johnson Quan McKay Mikel Milner Aye. Musselman Owen's pitcher Thumb Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vickers Aye. Weiler Wilson Winterton. President Adams Aye. Fifth

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Make a motion to adopt the Senate amendments.

Yes, please. Uh, this is, this is on the, on the Auto Body work bill that we all loved and passed from here and the Senate loved and passed it. But uh, the auto part manufacturers requested a one word change. They said it was a drafting error where it said equal instead of equivalent. So we changed one word from equal to equivalent. And now everybody's happy. Mr. Speaker.