Though undoubtedly a delight to shops opposed to non-OE parts, the lawsuits will have the opposite effect from that desired by these repairers. Faced with an expensive litigation and potential liability, insurers will find it necessary to steadfastly defend non-OE parts usage for as long as these suits persist. Last month's Editor's Page professed the need for change at CAPA due to their failure to reliably certify non-OE parts quality. Stopping short of calling for a change in management, i.e. Gillis must go, I proffered a change in policy and procedure to better the certification program CAPA promotes to the consumer and the industry. Even the consumer activist community, as reported in the Washington Post on March 18, appears to be calling Gillis' role at CAPA into question.
Solutions are harder to come by.
Certainly, consumer disclosure and consent to non-OE parts usage is a must. Further, changes in the CAPA program, or scrapping CAPA entirely, will be necessary. Also, more involvement and understanding of quality problems from both the distributors and manufacturers is necessary. Finally, the insurance industry must distance themselves from the issue, continuing to foster quality alternatives to OE, but not so stridently forcing usage in the field. If a repairer feels that they can install a non-OE part and stand behind it with their reputation, so be it.