Showing posts with label industry study. Show all posts
Showing posts with label industry study. Show all posts

January 15, 2018








"Want to get paid? Document everything your auto body shop does."

In an article written by John Huetter earlier this month, the insurance adjuster commented: "If you don't do it, I don't pay for it." and "If its not documented you don't get paid." Currently, only 5% - 10% of all auto body and collision shops are providing insurance companies with proper documentation for their work. At the end of the day (and the end of the repair), it falls on the shoulders of the body shop to show insurers (and customers) every repair completed and make sure that all work completed on the vehicle is listed in the invoice and/or estimate. Take these steps to establish a legally defensible invoice for your shop for every single job and get reimbursed fairly for each repair.

  • Document the labor and paint and material use for every repair.
  • Take photos of each step of the repair process.
  • Include all labor, paint and materials on every estimate and/or invoice.

Let PMCLogic help take the work out of documenting P&M's used for your shop by requesting your complimentary program evaluation of PMCLogic today. CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON PMCLogic.
For more information on documenting your shop's repairs, continue reading the RDN article below:

Adjuster: Want to get paid? Document everything your auto body shop does

By  on January 5, 2018 in Repair Driven News

A staff appraiser for a small national insurer this week pushed collision repairers to document every element of a collision repair, describing it as “a little more work, to get paid a lot more.”
The adjuster, whom we’ve agreed to keep anonymous to protect his job, provided a fascinating look at the business from an insurer’s perspective in an interview with us. He strongly encouraged shops to follow the lead of Montana shop owner Matthew McDonnell and his message of “transparency.”
McDonnell, who owns the small MSO the McDonnell Group, in 2017 promoted the idea that documentation gets a shop paid in interviews with us, at a Collision Industry Conference and at SEMA. The Montana repairer has said he learned how to properly document a repair from Collision Advice CEO Mike Anderson and by asking two insurers to teach what they needed.
It’s paid off with what McDonnell said was a 90 percent accounts receivable success rate despite often having “200-line estimates.”
McDonnell teaches “show what you do, and get paid for what you do,” the adjuster said. Label parts, photograph every step of a repair, and provide the OEM information to support what you’re doing.
“You’re going to get paid if you do all of those things, without an argument,” the appraiser said. “… I’ll pay you. Just show me.”
Shops who provide a “half-done estimate with no photos, I’m not paying you,” he said.
The insurer agreed that “severity’s definitely higher” for his carrier when this happens, but as so few shops — he estimated 5 to 10 percent — show their work, “Are we really paying that much more?”
“I do not get dinged in no way shape or form,” the adjuster said of his higher severity. The company ceased to grade adjusters on severity. Instead, it cares about factors like “leakage” and how many claims a staffer is handling.
“If it’s required to be there … we will absolutely follow what the OEM standards say,” he said of his company.
“You could teach a 12-year-old to do our job,” he said: If it’s documented, it gets paid. If every shop in the country learned from McDonnell, “insurance companies aren’t gonna like it.”

Documentation protects insurer against ‘leakage’ audit

“Leakage” in this case involves the adjuster paying line items on an estimate without something to support the decision, according to the adjuster.
This reveals why documentation is crucial. You might be frustrated at having to prove your work or expert opinion over and over. But the adjuster will be audited on how much documentation he provides to back up what he paid you, and he needs that material to protect himself even if he knows you’re right.
“That’s exactly it,” he said.
The appraiser’s company always pays with the documentation, but even if it didn’t, a shop could give the proof of the repair and the OEM instructions supporting it to the customer and let them challenge the carrier for denying something that obviously needed to be done, he suggested.
“If it’s required, it needs to be paid,” the adjuster said.

Shops ‘lazy’ about documentation

The real reason many shops aren’t getting paid is “they’re lazy,” he said.
“They don’t want to show in-process photos,” he said.
Are you fixing marks left by a frame machine? Show pre- and post-repair photos. Welding a quarter panel? Do the same. “Show all the damage,” he said.
Is a trunk interior a different color than the exterior? “Show a picture.”  Want to get paid for a painter’s time cleaning their gun? Document it.
Nine out of 10 shops don’t bother showing pre- and post-measurements of frame straightening, so why pay for it?
Many shops, “they don’t show very many photos at all,” the appraiser said. He recalled a BMW X5 with $27,000 worth of damage — and the shop only took nine photos. “‘You know what, I’m not paying you,'” he said.”
“That’s the issue that a lot of shops have to insurance companies,” he said.
Asked why a professional opinion wouldn’t be enough, as seems to be the case with doctors, the appraiser recounted one example of a health insurer who had demanded a photo of a surgical procedure.
“It’s pretty much the same thing as us in this field,” the appraiser said.  “… They’re asking for photos as well.”
Asked if he paid a shop for the time they spent collecting such exhaustive documentation, he wrote in an email, “I have never paid for administrative time, I feel that is part of getting paid. If it’s not documented you don’t get paid.”
This adjuster requires documentation to educate himself, survive an audit, and encourage the car to be fixed properly by sending shops to the OEM repair procedures. However, there’s also a cost-containment element as well, he acknowledged.
“If you don’t do it, I don’t pay for it,” he said.
Scanning
This adjuster pays for his own training into auto body repair. It’s not provided by his company, nor do his colleagues seem to be pursuing it on their own, he said. This training has taught him the importance of certain procedures like scanning, but the knowledge also can be used to suit his needs as a carrier.
For example, the adjuster says he knows he will always pay for scanning; he knows it’s necessary. However, if a shop doesn’t ask for scanning, he doesn’t include it on an estimate.
If the shop is savvy enough to do so, he will approve that line item but zero it out ($0). Once documentation is provided proving the scan — for example, an output showing the codes and the VIN of the car — he automatically pays the shop’s bill.
“I will absolutely pay for it,” he said. “… I don’t question scanning at all.”
This has been convenient for shops who know him — they can go ahead and scan the car, as he won’t fight them on it as long as they ultimately support it with documentation.
The company formally authorized appraisers to pay for scanning in October 2017, but “I’ve been paying it since Day One” without issue, he said.
He said he’s even used his familiarity with OEM repair procedures to nudge a couple of shops eager to learn in the right direction and improve both the repair quality and his own knowledge. If they add a procedure, he’ll ask if it’s what the OEM states.
“I now know if they’ve pulled them or not,” he said. The customer ideally gets a better repair, the claim file has its documentation, and he gets a chance to read repair procedures.

When insurer knows correct repair, shop doesn’t

Trying to grow one’s expertise through training can produce situations where the adjuster knows a necessary repair procedure being done. He said his shops who show an interest in learning will get a nudge in the right direction. But he’s not going to include the item for just any shop unless the shop asks for and documents it.
“I know it needs to be done, and they’re not doing it,” he said, calling that a difficult thing.
But at the end of the day, “the shop repairs the car,” he said — he won’t add items that should be done to an estimate just so the repairer will do them. “I don’t say, ‘Why isn’t it on there?'” he said.
“I know it should be on there,” he said, but he said he also knows who pays his salary.
He said he encounters a dilemma “every single day” regarding shop choice; he can’t tell the customer to take it somewhere else if he doesn’t think the shop is correct. He won’t always nudge the customer to ask for the correct repair either,; however, if the policyholder asks the right questions, “I will not lie to them.”

August 29, 2013

What our customers are saying about {Paint & Material Compensation}

I have been using PMCLogic for almost 2 years, it has made a huge difference in being paid correctly for paint and materials. It only takes about two minutes to create and print an accurate invoice. THANKS PMCLOGIC!!!
Matt Laney, Mitch Smith Chevrolet, Cullman, AL

PMCLogic has allowed us to get a better tracking of our material profitability and has helped us to get through the storm season. I cannot imagine not having PMCLogic in the our shops to help us maintain our paint profitability. PMC Logic has been a solution for us for the last two hail storms.
Chris Donnelly, Bodyworks Collision Centers, Oklahoma City, OK

I have been using PMCLogic for 10 years and it has proven  to be an important profit source in my shop.  I like the fact that I can set the templates to the way we make repairs and with the materials we use in repairs.  Now that we have networked PMCLogic with our paint mixing computer we can job cost every repair with exactly what we mix.
Thomas Rogers, Roy Rogers Body Shop, Laurel, MS

   I would like to take this opportunity to thank you guys for the development of such a monumental change for the Auto Body Repair industry. PMCLogic has finally allowed my shop to get paid for the items necessary to repair vehicles that have been neglected ,and have impacted our profits for so many years. We now get paid so much more mainly on medium to large jobs, in some cases as much as $15.00 per hour above our normal hourly rate for paint and materials .PMCLogic has been instrumental in our shop being profitable after twenty five years of just throwing a dollar figure at our refinish labor rates and praying that we make a small profit or at least break even enough to pay our bills.
   We now know how much money that we were losing on most jobs and, I can’t help but be sad that we left so much money on the table that rightfully belonged in our bank account. I will continue to sing the praises of PMCLogic to everyone in the auto repair industry and hope that they will also accept your free trial, and submit those itemized invoices to the insurers and see how easy it is to put more money in the bank.
 Mack Gunter,  Gunter Body Shop, Jasper AL

We were stuck in the old ways of "estimating" materials according to the paint hours.  After using PMC Logic, we can generate an accurate invoice of materials used to return a vehicle to pre-accident condition.  Now we get paid for what we actually use!  It's amazing to see how much we were letting go out the door just because we didn't have a way to invoice it.  And the best part is that it's so easy to use!
-Dave Stewart at Stewart’s Auto Repair, FL

Since we started using PMC Logic on almost every job ticket, we are now making a profit on materials. This system is user friendly and shows an accurate breakdown of all it takes to correctly repair a damaged vehicle. Great product and well worth our investment.

David Shaddix, Earl’s Body Shop, Cullman, AL

February 20, 2012

Paint and Material Compensation and Cost Study

Executive Summary

The Paint and Material Compensation Cost Study is based on a peer-contributed panel of over 65 collision industry professionals. A cross-sample of representatives were interviewed to articulate their perspectives on the issues surrounding paint and material compensation from the viewpoint of their respective constituencies.

If requested, future topics will be discussed with the panel and feature a wide range of data, ideas and expertise. We anticipate the study will generate further discussion and introduce new evidence and ideas that
evolve in the collision repair industry.

Study Topic: Paint and Material Compensation Methodology

Innovative advances in paint and material technology have undoubtedly improved the quality of collision repairs in the United States. For some Repairers, receiving proper compensation for these advances have not presented a problem. For others, the lack of properly negotiated rates or alternative compensation methods have presented some serious challenges.

Although profitability on paint and materials may not be viewed as the most significant driver of a shop's success, it could be an inhibitor if not permitted to keep pace with future concerns.

On July 20th, 2011, in Salt Lake City, UT, the Collision Industry Conference (CIC) Refinish Committee, comprised of: Moderator, John Bosin, (Fix Auto), Doug Kelly, President, (CynCast), Aaron Marshall, CEO, (Marshall Auto Body), Joe Mattos, CEO, (Pro Finishes Plus) and Richard Palmer, CEO, (ComputerLogic), presented the topic: “Improving Paint Shop Efficiency in a Consolidating Market”. A segment of the presentation included the impact on the current methodology for paint and materials compensation in consideration of existing or potential new technology.

Due to time constraints, the panel had only a limited opportunity to fully discuss the topic during the scheduled session. To further explore the challenges related to this compensation methodology issue, panelist Richard Palmer commissioned this independent study.

In the interview process, key individuals and organizations have been identified to interact with the CIC Refinish Committee and continue the discussion.
Study Objectives

1. Consider the opinions of a representative cross-sample of constituencies to clarify the
profitability/performance dynamic of multiplying the number of refinish hours/units by a specified
dollar rate as a primary method of compensation for paint and material usage.
2. To identify the different methods of paint & materials compensation being used and estimate their
prevalence in the industry so that the CIC Refinish committee can recommend alternative solutions
based on the advantages and disadvantages of each method.
3. To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the different compensation methods relative to their
accuracy, fairness and ease of use.
4. To encourage suggestions from study respondents and consider factors important to the acceptance of
alternative compensation methods/systems by the insurance carriers.
5. Build an environment of collaboration by harnessing the power of the collective efforts of selected
individuals considered to be influential in future collision repair discussions. 4

Study Questions

1. What is your opinion of the current methodology used for paint and material compensation?
2. On a scale of 0 to 10 with 0 being “not important at all” and 10 being “extremely important”, where would you rate Paint & Material Compensation on the list of other issues that you're monitoring? Why would you rate that number to the issue?
3. What different methods of Paint & Materials Compensation are you aware of? What would you say
are the advantages and disadvantages of each method?
4. If it were up to you, what method would you use to address the P&M Compensation issue?

This report attempts to provide decision-makers with a third-party view of what a broad spectrum of industry stakeholders consider most important in the paint and material compensation discussion. It offers successfully proven alternative methods of compensation being used today and collaborative insight to add flexibility with fairness to insurers, repairers and suppliers in addressing the issue.

To see the full report, please click HERE