One doesn’t have to be in the car repair industry to know that improperly performed repairs are best avoided. Even if a vehicle leaves the shop looking like new, issues can soon arise. Panels may pull away from the vehicle, for example, or they may begin to corrode. More drastically, the number of secondary owners experiencing catastrophic failures attributable to improper repairs has skyrocketed in the last few years. In the worst cases, these failures have resulted in loss of life or severe injury. Often, they result in liabilities — not to mention bad PR — for body shops. In addition to liability, body shops that are responsible for improper vehicle repairs face the potential for vehicle buyback in which the shop must buy back a car because of repair quality. Typically, third-party inspectors consulted by the customer will be in the position to make this judgement.
Auto repair industry groups recognize that original equipment manufacturer (OEM) repair instructions are the standard of care. The Collision Industry Conference (CIC) Definitions Committee is an industry volunteer group comprised of repairers, insurers and suppliers, and this committee maintains a “Collision Industry Conference Collision Repair Provider Definition.” The definition states that collision repair providers must “utilize and have access to published OEM body specifications and procedures (including suspension alignment specifications and advanced safety system recalibration/initialization procedures) with the most current updates available as required by vehicle manufacturer.”
Meeting the standard of the CIC not only involves a significant time investment for individual vehicle repair jobs but entails keeping shop equipment and technology up to date as per OEM recommendations. Making these investments is worthwhile, however, considering the risks. Ultimately, body shops are answerable to vehicle owners, not insurers.
Vehicle technologies are changing fast
Once upon a time, bodywork on one make or model was roughly the same as on any other make or model. But as cars became more complex — with new technologies, new materials and even new metals being used for auto construction — this ceased to be the case, and cars needed more tailored repair solutions. The situation becomes more pressing as advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) are implemented in new vehicle designs. Technologies that were, even recently, reserved for high-tech applications, such as radar, sonar and light detection and ranging (lidar), are becoming smaller and cheaper to implement, which means they are making their way into systems used on passenger vehicles. Almost every component of an autobody now is, or may be, connected to a network of sensors and computer systems that are highly calibrated and can dramatically influence the safety and drivability of the car. For example, most newer automobiles have lights installed on door mirrors that illuminate when another car on the road enters a driver’s blind spot. In order to illuminate at the right time, these lights depend on sensors. Any time the mirror is removed or adjusted as part of a car repair, the sensor system must be completely recalibrated — otherwise the sensor may not function properly when the vehicle is back on the road and the result is a safety hazard. One clear sign that times have changed is that shops no longer provide “estimates” for car repair work — they provide “blueprints.” An “estimate” is great for determining a rough range of repair cost, or if the vehicle is a probable total loss, but the repairer who is ultimately responsible for the end result must compile a true repair plan and obtain approval from the vehicle owner and the insurer. Blueprints assess the current state of the vehicle as well as planned repairs. To produce a blueprint, technicians must go beyond performing a simple visual inspection of recent damage. They must look at the car’s overall interior and exterior condition, including alignment of parts and systems, and must also note obvious vehicle option packages that have been installed, because different packages entail the addition of different computerized and other systems into the vehicle and can have a significant impact on the overall repair process. The blueprinting process may involve disassembling and inspecting parts of the car and/or using diagnostic tools. This change in process reflects a much greater need for detail than was required just a few years ago and puts technicians in the position of fully mapping out their work in advance.
When repair blueprints allow shop personnel to use “or equivalent” materials, this puts the personnel in the position of acting as materials engineers — which isn’t something that can be done on the fly. To determine equivalencies, shops must work with materials manufacturers and suppliers. For example, when it comes to “equivalent” adhesives, many factors can influence what constitutes an equivalency. These include bond strength, elasticity, corrosion protection capability, application location, and more. Experienced industry workers can recall times this has been the case even with simple engine repairs, such as a valve cover resealing, when use of an incorrect sealant (i.e., a sealant that is not “sensor safe”) could wipe out oxygen sensors.
As another example, consider the panel bonding or fastening stage of repair work. Whether using mechanical fasteners or adhesives, or a combination of the two, panels need to be completely laid out and fitted to the vehicle before the fastening stage is reached. Once an adhesive has been applied to a substrate, the clock is ticking on the product’s working window. If the panels are pulled apart and refitted after adhesive has been applied, air becomes trapped in the adhesive and can potentially cause weak panel joints or, depending on the adhesive used, curing issues. Quality problems can creep in with something as simple as not having enough clamps on-hand to temporarily attach to the panel as it is bonded.
Similarly, quality issues can be avoided by carefully preparing adhesives prior to application. Improper preparation is at the root of almost every adhesive-related “failure.” While people often speak of “bad glue,” and in rare cases use an internal lab to test a “failed” product, rarely, if ever, is “bad glue,” or improperly formulated adhesive, found to be the problem. A mix-ratio problem is almost always at fault. If two-component (2K) products are “off ratio,” then they will not have all of the manufacturer’s stated properties and may not even cure. The three most important steps for using all adhesive products are as follows:
Check the expiration date, not the lot number and dating on the repair order. If the dating is in a cryptic code, and you don’t have the formula or cryptic decoder ring, then call the manufacturer and ask!
Level the cartridge. Purge the open-ended cartridge until some of the side “A” and “B” products come out. Failure to do this step will result in an off-ratio mix from the outset. The same is true for single component products, which could have a layer of material that has “settled” or might contain fluid that has come out of suspension. After purging a little material out of the cartridge, the balance of the material should be fine in most cases.
After attaching the mixer, and in the moments before actual use, purge a mixer’s-length bead of material and dispose of it as scrap. This will ensure that the mix is homogenous and/or well blended.
Meeting the standard of care
For body shops to meet the standard of care, the key is to do pre-work, not rework. Keeping abreast of OEM procedures requires an ongoing, day-to-day commitment. Consulting the procedures should be part of every repair job, since procedures can be very fluid, sometimes changing daily. This is especially the case when it comes to newer vehicle models. It is also important that shop personnel directly consult a vehicle’s OEM site because it is the manufacturer who will have the most current information on its own procedures. A useful website for shops is oem1stop.com, which provides a portal to every manufacturer and their service data. There is no better way to ensure that all shop personnel are performing high-quality work than to invest in training. Ranging from training on the frame rack and three-dimensional measuring system to training on the proper use of adhesives, every aspect of the repair process must adhere to OEM procedures. It is also important to note that one-time training will not fully prepare an employee to perform work. The human mind is only capable of retaining a percentage of the information imparted on any given training day. Therefore, re-training should not be looked at as mere repetition. Re-training gives workers the opportunity to add to and solidify their knowledge base—and this will translate into a long future of better repairs.
Product vendors and/or suppliers are excellent resources when it comes to training. During the 2020 pandemic, many companies began offering remote, digital training to complement—or even replace—some in-person training. These increased offerings allow shops a greater access to training overall. Shops can pick the format that fits their budgets and logistics.
In order to perform their best work — and avoid safety or liability issues — body shops should avoid trying to meet an unrealistic timeline. Rushing repair work rarely improves a shop’s return on investment in the long run. Cycle times are important but pushing to meet a fixed deadline (for example, when rental cars and their associated costs are involved) can lead to various kinds of repair inadequacies. Be realistic in repair planning to determine an achievable exit date. Part delays, chemical cure times, calibration time, and perhaps transportation for the calibration—even “human time”—need to be understood and planned for.
In the end there are many things which can negatively impact a repair. Understand and plan for these so there is no issue. The goal is to repair every vehicle back to OEM specifications and a factory-level safety.
