Bill would brand vehicles with major frame damage as structurally totaled; insurers and trade groups raise concerns

Sen. Dan Quick introduced LB 112 to add a new category to Nebraska's salvage-title rules: a “structurally totaled” designation for vehicles where damage to frame, rails or other structural components (including engine cradle or rear differential) is severe and repair costs exceed a defined threshold.

“Structurally totaled vehicle means a vehicle totally totaled due to a kink or crease in a frame or rail… The cost of repairs must exceed 75% of the actual cash value of the vehicle,” Quick said in his opening remarks and indicated a pending amendment to clarify distinctions between cosmetic and structural losses.

Auto-body industry representatives said the measure responds to cases in which vehicles with significant structural damage are repaired and resold as ordinary used cars without adequate disclosure, creating safety risk for subsequent owners. Dave Yard, chairman of the Nebraska Auto Body Association, described examples where repairs were superficial or incomplete and safety systems (airbag sensors, seat belts) were not restored properly. “This is a big deal,” Yard told the committee. Industry witnesses argued a structural-salvage brand would warn future buyers and reduce the number of unsafe vehicles returning to the road.

Opponents included the Nebraska Insurance Federation and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA). Robert Bell of the Insurance Federation said insurers currently make salvage determinations and that manufacturers design many modern unibody vehicles to be repairable after frame damage; he and APCIA warned that an automatic structural category could unnecessarily remove repairable vehicles from the used-vehicle market and increase costs for buyers and insurers.

APCIA lobbyist Justin Brady added that manufacturers build some models with unibody structures intended to be repairable and that a statutory, automatic structural brand could conflict with repair practices and manufacturer guidance. He said the association found few federal safety-agency findings showing systemic safety problems unique to rebuilt vehicles and emphasized other crash causes such as impaired driving and speeding.

The committee heard extensive back-and-forth on implementation details: who would make the structural determination (insurer, repair shop, or both), whether a structurally totaled vehicle could ever be rebuilt and retitled for road use, and whether a structural category should instead mean “parts only.” Quick signaled he would work with stakeholders on amendment language. The hearing produced active testimony on both sides; no committee vote was recorded.