Comment from Bellevue Body Shop

Bellevue Body ShopSupportBusiness
Summary: A repair shop owner supports the FTC's action to prevent unfair or deceptive AI practices in insurance claims handling. The commenter highlights issues with AI-driven "steering" of repair facilities and the sourcing of incorrect, cheaper parts, calling for transparency and nationwide standards.
I support the FTC in helping to prevent any and all "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce", especially regarding the use of AI in claims handling. Two examples come to mind. Recently a longstanding customer of ours with a State Farm claim wanted to use my shop as their repair facility. But as they were setting up the initial steps to their claim on their phone (app?), they could not get past the screen that only allowed them to select one of only a few repair facilities. There was no way to select the shop of their choice. Wouldn't that lead them to believe it was not possible at all, and that they HAD to use only certain shops? This is very anti commerce, and not far from illegal steering. The second example. Working on a claim with Progressive. Accurate part sourcing has become a problem. The Progressive adjusters have stated they are required to use their own part source program many times. I can tell the human adjuster that the parts on their estimate are incorrect. But all they can do is send the parts list through their program again, and it will just give them back the same incorrect part. In this case one of the parts was a grille and the styling was different. Lets say the grille was completely missing. And the parts were ordered based off the insurer estimate. A technician could have easily installed the wrong grille. A cheaper grille on this vehicle, which would devalue the vehicle. The relevant point is, human adjusters have been unable to make changes due to the program they are required to use. In my experience the incorrect parts are cheaper, the mistake always is in the insurers favor. Consumers need some protection here. AI is going to continue to source cheap unreliable parts. And insurers will state that a shop HAS to purchase those parts first, and prove they are inferior, before being able to pay for the parts that actually get the job done correctly. This either causes avoidable delays, or illegitimate out of pocket expenses. I’m very concerned moving forward, that a repairer wouldn’t even be able to convince an AI model that a part is incorrect or doesn’t fit. That would be the pinnacle of an unfair practice. Insurers using their own AI models to handle claims should be thoroughly transparent and held to nationwide standards that protect the consumers and repairers from inaccuracies or technological roadblocks.

View on Regulations.gov