There was recent activity in five industry-related lawsuits as they proceed through the process in U.S federal courts around the country.
The Florida Supreme Court in September ruled that GEICO cannot sue an auto glass company in that state under the Florida Motor Vehicle Repair Act (FMVRA). Glassco, Inc., had originally sued the insurer over what it called “deeply discounted” reimbursement for insurance claims. GEICO countersued, alleging Glassco would have insured customers assign rights to all insurance payments for repairs without informing the customers what services would be needed.
A federal appeals court ruling in the case asked the Florida Supreme Court whether the FMVRA gives an insurer the right to sue the shop for failure to provide a written estimate. That court now has answered “no” to that question, saying the law in question focuses almost exclusively on the interactions between a “repair shop and the person who presents the car for repair.” It mentions insurers only once, relative to prohibiting substitution of used parts for new without notifying the insurer.
“GEICO concedes that it is not a ‘customer’ under the statute’s definition of the term,” the opinion said, and the FMVRA only gives a shop’s customer the right to sue. Glassco may have violated the FMVRA, the court said, but that doesn’t give GEICO a cause of action.
The ruling also said violations under FMVRA do not necessarily render “a subsequent repair invoice entirely void,” the other issue the appeals court posed to the Florida Supreme Court. The case now returns to the appeals court.
Dealer Group Gets Its Management System Data
Any body shop that has struggled to get a copy of its data from an estimating or management system provider when switching to another provider may appreciate that a federal judge in Georgia has ordered the dealership management system firm CDK Global to provide four Asbury Automotive Group dealerships with their data as those dealerships prepare to switch from CDK to the Tekion dealership management system.
Asbury, which has used CDK’s system for more than a dozen years, has said it plans to switch all of its dealerships over to Tekion by 2027.
“CDK’s intent has become quite clear, that it intends to quash its competitor, Tekion, and force Asbury to stay on CDK’s platform by holding [Asbury’s] data hostage in direct violation of the parties’ agreement,” Asbury’s lawsuit alleged.
CDK countersued, accusing Asbury of using software to improperly collect its information stored within CDK’s platform, and saying if Asbury had wanted its data, it needed to switch its customer status with CDK in advance, foregoing special pricing and other perks it had in its current agreement.
Consumers Sue Over Release of Accident Reports
In late September, a North Carolina federal judge said the City of Charlotte violated federal privacy law by making car accident reports public in a way that law firms could use the disclosed data for marketing purposes, granting summary judgment and certification to a class of drivers. The city plans to appeal the ruling.
Heather Durham sued the city, saying its police department improperly disclosed her personal information on an accident report “to persons it knew were acquiring the information for marketing purposes,” violating the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act.
State law requires filing of a police report after any accident involving an injury or property damage exceeding $1,000.
Although Durham claimed she was contacted only by an attorney who allegedly obtained her information through the accident report, others who could potentially be part of the class action say they were contacted by body shops that had similarly obtained accident report information.
New Documents May Revive Lawsuit
In a possible turnaround in another lawsuit, Repairify, parent company of asTech, told a federal court in Texas that its new counsel has identified a document it says unequivocally demonstrates the company’s rights to patents it argues were violated by LKQ Corporation subsidiary Keystone Automotive, doing business as Elitek Vehicle Services.
Repairify had sued LKQ related to violations of three patents, but this past summer, a week before the trial was set to again, Repairify agreed to settle the portion of the lawsuit related to two of the patents when the court found the documents Repairify produced did not establish the company owned those two patents. In light of the new document, Repairify is now asking the court to reverse its dismissal related to those two patents.
Counter Suit Against GM Can Continue
Also recently, a federal judge in Michigan denied General Motors' motion to dismiss an aftermarket parts retailer’s claim that the automaker was behind a government raid of its warehouses. GM is suing Quality Collision Parts for patent infringement, saying the company sells non-OEM parts that violate GM’s design patents.
Quality Collision Parts earlier this year counter sued, challenging the validity of the patents and arguing GM “has unclean hands in the way it pursued whatever patent rights it had before the present case started.” Its tortious interference counter suit says GM used “false or misleading allegations” to “improperly influence the Department of Homeland Security to conduct a raid on Quality Collision’s warehouses.”
While dismissing some claims in Quality Collision’s counter suit, Judge Denise Hood allowed the tortious interference allegation to stand, saying Quality Collision had adequately stated a claim that GM had known in advance about the raid, cooperated with the government, and knew it would be disruptive to Quality Collision’s business and would help the automaker with its planned design patent infringement lawsuit.
In seeking to dismiss the counter suit, GM’s filing stated Quality Collision’s “delusional allegations are not grounded in reality.”
John Yoswick