Re: [GRRN] State Farm Auto Insurance Lawsuit

David Wood (
Thu, 07 Oct 1999 11:27:44 -0500

As I understand the judgment in this case (which will be appealed by State
Farm, likely to reduce the award but not the ruling), the issue was
disclosure in their policies. The terms of their policies did not
contradict the use of remanufactured parts but would lead a reasonable
policy-holder to think their car was being repaired with new parts.

Insurance companies have a financial incentive to contract for the use of
remanufactured parts; I don't think this case will undercut that. The
companies need to be clearer in their policies and disclosures to consumers.

Your point is a good one.

At 12:06 PM 10/07/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>I'm wondering if anyone knows details about the lawsuit in Illinois where a
>jury just ruled that State Farm breached its contract with auto policy
>holders by requiring body shops to use lower-priced generic body parts for
>crash repairs, rather than those made by the auto manufacturers. The article
>in my newspaper only mentions parts like hoods and bumpers, but I'm concerned
>that this might throw a shadow over remanufactured parts like carburetors,
>engines and other machinery, which would set back reuse efforts.
>Susan Kinsella
>Susan Kinsella
>Conservatree and
>Susan Kinsella & Associates
>Novato, CA 94949
>Phone/Fax: 415/883-6264
> To post to the greenyes list, send a letter to:
> To unsubscribe, send a message to:
> with the subject
>unsubscribe. If you have any problems, please
>write to
> GreenYes is archived on the GrassRoots Recycling
>Network web site:

David Wood
Senior Associate
Center on Wisconsin Strategy
1180 Observatory Drive, Rm. 7122
Madison WI 53706