$17M Jury Award Against American Family Mutual Reinstated
Midwest News • May 6, 2009
A Missouri appeals court has reinstated a $17 million jury award in a class action lawsuit against American Family Mutual Insurance Co. over aftermarket vehicle parts.
The Missouri Court of ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: Aftermarket vs. OEM
Posted On: May 6, 2009, 3:47 pm CDT
Posted By: Mike Orton
Comment:
quote
The Plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that aftermarket parts are not of like kind and quality to OEM parts, end quote
I suppose now it is unreasonable for anyone to conclude that oem and a/m are the same, at least in Missouri. Missouri statutes require that aftermarket parts be equal to and of the same value (LKQ)like,kind, and quality as the original parts. I am not sure how Missouri insurers reconcile this statute now with contracts or policies that have been issued to Missouri policyholders wherein they state they can use these parts by virtue of contract. It seems now that those contracts may be invalid or misrepresented. Now that would be a reasonable way of looking at it from a bunch of previously unreasonable (the only ones) collision business owners that have had the courage to make this claim in the past and be slandered for making such a statement.
Subject: RE: Aftermarket vs. OEM
The Plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that aftermarket parts are not of like kind and quality to OEM parts, end quote
I suppose now it is unreasonable for anyone to conclude that oem and a/m are the same, at least in Missouri. Missouri statutes require that aftermarket parts be equal to and of the same value (LKQ)like,kind, and quality as the original parts. I am not sure how Missouri insurers reconcile this statute now with contracts or policies that have been issued to Missouri policyholders wherein they state they can use these parts by virtue of contract. It seems now that those contracts may be invalid or misrepresented. Now that would be a reasonable way of looking at it from a bunch of previously unreasonable (the only ones) collision business owners that have had the courage to make this claim in the past and be slandered for making such a statement.