ADALB Throws Negotiations Out the Window

Published in New England Automotive Report – Thomas Greco Publishing

Merriam-Webster defines the word negotiate as “to bring about through discussion and compromise,” yet some members of the Auto Damage Appraiser Licensing Board (ADALB) appear uncertain what constitutes a negotiation, despite the fact that these two terms appear a half dozen times in Regulation 212 CMR 2.00 et seq.

Although the ADALB’s January 21 meeting included a brief review of the proposed amendments to the regulation, that discussion focused on revisions to 2.02(7) Conflict of Interest and 2.02(8) Revocation or Suspension of a License. 

The apparent uncertainty over what constitutes a negotiation arose during the review of six complaints filed by auto body shops against insurance appraisers, a portion of the meeting that also elicited confusion related to what constitutes a complaint and what it means for the Board to move forward with a complaint. 

One complaint accused the appraiser of failure to negotiate, and when Smith indicated that the appraiser’s refusal to pay the amount requested by the shop did not constitute a failure to negotiate, Johnson objected that “Nope, I’m not paying for that” is not a negotiation. Board member Carl Garcia (Carl’s Collision Center; Fall River) suggested that “part of the conversation is a better description of ‘negotiation.’”

As the Board discussed a complaint related to an appraisal being altered without negotiation after it had been “written and locked,” Attorney Michael Powers veered completely off topic from the issue at hand. He noted that the vehicle owner had paid the difference between the shop’s invoice and the insurer’s short pay, questioning why a complaint was even filed.

“So, if an appraiser doesn’t pay properly to repair a car or does not negotiate properly, and I back charge the customer and get the money, that means the appraiser did not break the law?” Board member Bill Johnson (Pleasant Street Auto; South Hadley/Belchertown) asked. ““You’re saying the I [licensed insurance appraiser] didn’t break the CMR because I [the shop] got paid all of my money [from the vehicle owner]?” Getting paid doesn’t negate the fact that the appraiser shouldn’t have done what he did.”

Chairman Michael Donovan expressed the belief that the complaint was related to the monetary issue and therefore had no place being brought before the Board. “Everything we do is a money issue – the crux of the matter is the appraisal was changed,” Johnson vented his exasperation. “Somebody wrote an appraisal, locked it and then changed it with no prior negotiation. That’s a violation of the CMR.”

At several points during the review of complaints, Board member Peter Smith (MAPFRE) expressed the need to “get the other side of the story.” 

“That’s what moving forward means,” Johnson agreed. “We notify the employee and ask questions to get the other side of the story.” 

The Board voted unanimously to move two complaints forward, and one was tabled due to confusion surrounding the issue presented within it. The remaining three complaints were dismissed with the two auto body representatives effectively voting to move forward, while the insurers voted to dismiss; in all three instances, Chairman Michael Donovan sided with the insurers.

The ADALB is tentatively scheduled to reconvene on March 25 at 11am in the DOI’s new location at One Federal Street on the 7th floor. Information pertaining to the ADALB’s meeting schedule and planned agenda is typically posted by the Friday prior to the meeting at bit.ly/ADALBagendas. 

AASP/MA members are strongly encouraged to listen to the recording of the January 21 meeting in the Members Only section of aaspma.org for a glimpse into the inner workings of the ADALB. View the meeting agenda at bit.ly/ADALB012125. More detailed coverage of this meeting appears in the February issue of Damage Report, AASP/MA’s members-only newsletter.