1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 
SHOP TALK
Page 135
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The row between the Vehicle Builders and Repairers Association (VBRA) and the Motor Insurance Research Centre (MIRC) raises a lot of questions, not least of which is who's kidding who?
The VBRA claims that a computer costing over £100 per month to rent is needed to mix paint in the quantities specified by MIRC's new guide. The MIRC, however, contends that any skilled painter can do the job unaided.
Bodyshop managers may well wonder how objective the MIRC can be when it is owned by the insurance companies. The guide is. after all, the basis on which payments of insurance claims are assesed. It may also seem unfair that the insurers have their income protected by law, after all, every haulier must insure his trucks, but still seek to limit the level of their own expenditure. If the MIRC is only interested in protecting its paymasters, instead of looking at the service offered to the customer, disaster will follow.
In the nineties the level of customer service must go up. Arguments like this can only drive it down.
Will operators continue to pay for fully comprehensive in surance cover if the repairs they get after accidents are debateable? And will they recom mend the bodyshop, or the insurer concerned to fellow operators? Fat chance.