Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Auto Insurance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate erupts over right‑to‑appraisal bill for auto claims; committee seeks more data
Summary
Collision repair advocates urged a statutory right to appraisal to address alleged underpayments and promote transparency; insurers warned such laws in other states increased repair times and premiums. Committee directed staff to convene a March panel and request CSI/NAIC data before advancing a bill.
The committee examined a draft 'right‑to‑appraisal' auto insurance bill presented by the Montana Collision Repair Association and heard extended public testimony for and against legislative action.
Collision repair representatives and independent consultants told the committee that appraisal rights are a consumer protection tool: independent appraisals can resolve disputes where repairers say insurers underpaid for necessary parts or procedures. Repair advocates urged statutory appraisal mechanisms because they said insureds currently have limited recourse beyond litigation to dispute insurer valuations. They also provided redlines and asked the committee to treat the draft as a starting point for stakeholder negotiation.
Insurers (NAMIC, State Farm and others) opposed committee action, arguing that experience in other states shows appraisal laws can raise claim costs, lengthen repair times and push up premiums. Industry witnesses said appraisal disputes were exploited by a minority of shops and cited examples from other states where appraisals produced higher invoice outcomes and added administrative burden. They urged the committee not to adopt a committee bill but to allow a legislator‑sponsored bill to follow the normal process if sponsors wish.
Committee response: Lawmakers acknowledged conflicting testimony. Several members asked CSI to provide claim‑level data, nonrenewal and premium‑impact statistics and NAIC materials used in other states so the committee could judge the magnitude of any problem and the likely premium impacts. Members agreed to host a balanced March panel that includes insurers, collision repair representatives, consumer advocates, and CSI/NAIC analysts to collect evidence before deciding whether to advance the draft as committee legislation.
Next steps: Staff will schedule the March panel, request data from CSI and NAIC and circulate the draft and redlines from stakeholder groups so committee members can review evidence before taking further action.
