Prosser, WA, May 20, 2009 - The Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS) has joined efforts currently supported by a number of collision repair organizations across the country in a request to the Department of Justice, and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, to investigate violations of federal antitrust laws that seemingly take place in today's marketplace.

 

"Stemming from the circulation of a petition designed for leaders of state associations, SCRS felt compelled to offer our support of the efforts underway," stated Barry Dorn, SCRS Chairman. "Our board believed that a letter from the only national trade association dedicated to representing the collision repairer which articulated similar perspectives as those outlined in the petition would help to highlight the importance of the issues raised."

 

SCRS Executive Director Aaron Schulenburg added, "SCRS has long claimed that our members and affiliate associations are the heartbeat of our organization. We are very confident in our approach and support of this issue because direct correspondences with those members have confirmed the importance of such efforts, and we believe that grassroots efforts such as those that demonstrate the unified voice of the collision repairer are an imperative element in moving this industry forward."

 

The SCRS letter, which will be sent directly to Attorney General Holder, is as follows:

 

Dear Attorney General Holder:

            In the early 1960's, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy directed the United States Department of Justice to investigate the market conduct activity of certain insurers and insurance sponsored associations with respect to appraisals and repairs of insured damaged automobiles. The investigation found that 265 insurance companies, represented primarily by three national associations, were in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Department of Justice filed a civil suit in U.S. District Court in New York against the insurers, and charged them with violation of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act.

            Prior to trial, the parties agreed to a Consent Order which was approved by the court and signed on October 23, 1963. Section IV of the Final Judgment, as approved by the court, stated the defendants and co-conspirators would not operate or participate in any plan, program or practice that recommended appraisers, steer to any business or person, or away from any appraiser or repairer, control activities of appraisers, allocate customers-markets-business of appraisers, or fix, establish or control prices paid for appraisals or charged by repair shops for the repair of damage to automotive vehicles or for replacement parts or labor in connection therewith, whether by coercion, boycott or intimidation or by the use of flat rate or parts manuals or otherwise.

            Below is the relevant passage. 

(A) Each defendant is enjoined from placing into effect any plan, program or practice which has the purpose or effect of: (1) sponsoring, endorsing or otherwise recommending any appraiser of damage to automobile vehicles: (2) directing, advising or otherwise suggesting that any person or firm do business or refuse to do business with (a) any appraiser of damage to automobile vehicles with respect to the appraisal of such damage, or (b) any independent or dealer franchised automotive repair shop with respect to the repair of damage to automobile vehicles; (3) exercising any control over the activities of any appraiser of damage to automotive vehicles; (4) allocating or dividing customers, territories, markets or business among any appraisers of damage to automotive vehicles; or (5) fixing, establishing, maintaining or otherwise controlling the prices to be paid for the appraisal of damage to automotive vehicles, or to be charged by independent or dealer franchised automotive repair shops for the repair of damage to automotive vehicles or for replacement parts or labor in connection therewith, whether by coercion, boycott or intimidation or by the use of flat rate or parts manuals or otherwise.

 

            It is our understanding the 1963 Consent Decree, so-called, remains in effect today and is enforceable by the Department of Justice, who has sole standing privileges. As such, we also understand that several organizations and individuals have tried to get the U.S. Department of Justice to enforce the Decree over the years, and that a renewed effort is underway by many representatives of the collision repair industry. We wish to express to you our support of the concerns of these entities, and make a request of our own.