American Family Mutual Insurance will not be specifying aftermarket parts on repair estimates in Missouri pending an appeal before the state's Supreme Court.

PHOTOS COURTESY OF VLADIMIR PCHOLKIN/GETTY IMAGES; STOCKBYTE/GETTY IMAGES ILLUSTRATION: MICHAEL STASSUS

"It wouldn't be prudent to continue that practice in light of the appellate court's decision," says Steve Witmer, an American Family spokesman who notes that he is only referring to the aftermarket parts issue.

News Recap

Witmer goes on to say that "the use of aftermarket parts can bring financial relief to the consumer."

"This case, as much as any, was a battle of the experts," wrote Missouri appellate court Judge Harold L. Lowenstein. "Both sides presented the testimony of numerous experts to support their contentions and refute those of their opponent. Courts are wary about wading into such a battle and routinely decline to pass upon the credibility of witnesses or second-guess whom the jury chose to believe."

The highly complex opinion encompasses 30 pages, covering a case first filed in 2000. A Jackson County jury trial last year determined that the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit, representing some 319,000 Missouri residents, had "suffered damage" from the insurance company's policy of paying for vehicle repairs based on the cost of cheaper aftermarket parts. Three months later the presiding judge threw out the verdict, saying the plaintiffs had not provided adequate evidence of that damage.

The three-member appeals panel says the trial judge's decision was wrong and the jury's verdict is to be restored. The case was sent back to the original judge "for additional relief and attorney's fees."

The appeals court ruling reads in part: "That these repairs were not specified on the estimate meant that the estimate did not include the labor and materials necessary to perform the repairs. Thus, American Family did not pay sufficient funds to return the car to pre-loss condition. Whether the repairs were actually done is not relevant to whether American Family breached their contract with the insureds by failing to include sufficient time and materials to pay for all necessary repairs to return the car to pre-loss condition."

Lowenstein further wrote that "even assuming that American Family's 'ignorance' would excuse its failure to allocate time and materials for the performance of these repairs and that such 'ignorance' was a defense to the breach of contract claim, the record was replete with evidence from which a reasonable juror could find that American Family knew the omitted repairs were required but left undone."

Much of the legal wrangling centers on the performance of aftermarket components compared to that of OEM parts.

"All aftermarket crash parts are not the same like kind and quality as OEM crash parts," says Bob Redding, Washington, D.C. representative for the Automotive Service Association (ASA).

"We need more public policy focus on the quality issue," he asserts. "We could start with laws that assure consumers know what types of parts are being used on their vehicles and consent to the use of those specific parts."