A question of credibilityThe front cover of this month’s ABRN details the television coverage of fraud among California repairers and insurers. This news, coupled with the ongoing issue of thousands of lawsuits filed against repairers, is deeply troubling. Beyond the damage it has caused to the image of thousands of reputable repair facilities, recent developments point toward a fundamental problem with the agency responsible for protecting consumers.A CBS News report broadcast at the end of December, which reported on the ongoing investigations by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) into alleged fraud by repairers, implied that not only do repair shops act fraudulently far too frequently, but that insurance companies are an accomplice in this fraud against consumers through their direct repair programs (DRPs). Both of these allegations by the BAR are very serious, though the BAR’s conclusions are suspect.While no shop owner doubts that fraud exists in the collision repair community, few believe the problem is as widespread as the BAR alleges. This doubt is justified given the BAR’s recent backpedaling on the seriousness of the violation notices that it regularly issues to shops when problems are found during its inspections. The allegation that the insurance industry is complicit with fraudulent repairers strains credulity. The notices issued by the BAR, until recently posted on its Web site, are the basis for thousands of lawsuits filed against repairers who have received notices of violation. These repairers believe that they are the targets of frivolous lawsuits allowed by a quirk in California law in which lawyers can sue on behalf of the public based upon the unadjudicated findings of regulators. They, and other industries that have found themselves the targets of similar lawsuits, have complained to their representatives in California’s legislature. Public hearings were held in January, and in response, the BAR suspended the issuance of these notices and removed what little information about them that was available on the Internet.The BAR maintains today that the violation notices it issues are really requests to repair facility operators to change their behavior. They were never meant to serve as citations, nor did they carry fines. The fact remains, however, that BAR’s regulators have hurt consumers. They will see higher prices from shops that must mount a costly defense against frivolous lawsuits. Also, the BAR’s overly complex regulations continue to drive up the costs of compliance and will eventually decrease the level of service vehicle owners receive and increase the time they are without their vehicles.Caliber Collision Centers has filed suit against the BAR, alleging that the regulator abused its authority by issuing the notices and failing to establish proper procedures as required by California law. It’s about time that the focus is put on the BAR, its regulations, tactics and efficacy in protecting California’s consumers. Caliber is not alone in its concern about the BAR’s abuse of its mandate.Virtually every California repairer I have spoken to about the BAR throughout the past few years doubts he or she would pass a BAR inspection unscathed. By far the most troubling aspect of shops’ comments about the BAR is the fear the regulator instills in the repair community. Few repairers would ever complain on the record about the BAR for fear of being persecuted for their public criticism of the bureau. This abuse by the BAR of its regulatory authority must not stand.The BAR was created to protect the consumers from automotive repair fraud. Most of the organization’s regulations are geared towards customer-pay mechanical repair and service. Because of this background, it further brings the BAR’s credibility into question as to whether it is able to effectively understand and regulate collision repairers and their relationships with vehicle owners and insurers.Repair industry groups have proposed that the BAR should become more of a board, with representation from both consumer and the repair industry, in addition to regulators. Legislators should seize upon this advice to improve the BAR’s ability to regulate and promote quality repairs—and offer true protection for the consumer, as it was intended.For many years, collision repairers have sought to work with the BAR to produce effective, enforceable regulations that truly benefit the automotive repair consumers. The regulator has largely ignored these efforts. The only way to improve consumer protection in California is for repairers to work with legislators to improve the BAR. 
