Connecticut Legislature Adjourns Without Passage of Auto Glass-Related TPA Bill
June 17, 2011

The Connecticut legislature adjourned its 2011 regular session on June 8 without passage of a proposed bill that would have addressed third-party administrators and the way consumers contacted their insurers for glass claims. The bill, introduced by Rep. Robert Megna, had been under the review of the Connecticut Insurance and Real Estate Commiteee.

While the original proposed bill contained language that would have prohibited an insurance adjustor or third-party administrator (TPA) “from having a financial interest in a business that installs automotive glass,” the bill was re-drafted in early March and this language was removed.

The latest draft of the bill would have made it illegal for insurers to “refer or route any insured directly or indirectly to a third-party adjuster or third-party claims administrator for claims or questions regarding automobile physical damage repairs, automobile glass replacement, automobile glass repair service or automobile glass products, without requiring the insured to contact directly the insured's insurance company first by telephone, facsimile or electronic means.”

In addition, the bill would have required the insurer to “inform such insured that the insured has the right to choose the licensed repair shop or facility where (A) the damage to the insured's motor vehicle will be repaired, or (B) the automobile glass will be repaired or replaced, as applicable.”

Megna had advised™ in April that the bill came about as a result of comments from independent glass shops in the state.

“Many small auto glass installers have complained to the insurance and real estate committee of an odd relationship [in which ] a glass installer and … a manufacturer (Safelite) is also a third-party claims administrator and that much, if not most, claims were getting routed directly Safelite due to this odd relationship,” said Megna.

The Connecticut General Assembly will begin its 2012 session convene in February.

At press time, Megna had not responded to requests for comment on whether the bill might be brought back in the future.

Need more info and analysis about the issues?
Subscribe to AGRR Magazine.