A national survey found that collision repair professionals, insurers, and automakers understand OEM repair procedures but struggle to apply them consistently due to fragmented documentation access, varying interpretations, high certification costs, and unclear calibration requirements.
- About 64% of survey respondents work in collision repair, 21% in insurance, 4% for automakers, and 11% in related roles like consulting and education.
- Most professionals report being knowledgeable about OEM requirements, but access to documentation remains inconsistent across multiple portals and systems.
- Calibration requirements are the most frequent point of tension, with varying standards and unclear communication between insurers and repair facilities.
- EV-related training and equipment costs create barriers for small independent facilities trying to meet OEM standards.
- Certification is valued as essential but often undervalued by insurers, making it difficult for shops to justify the investment to customers.
BODYSHOPS, INSURERS AND AUTOMAKERS AGREE ON THE RULES BUT NOT ON THE STEPS
Original equipment manufacturer’s rules are clear – but the way they should be applied isn’t, a new survey has found. A national Collision Repair survey conducted between Nov. 11 and Nov. 29, 2025 gathered feedback from collision industry professionals and those in related sectors. About 64 percent of the respondents work for or own collision repair facilities, 21 percent are employed by insurance companies, four percent for automakers and 11 percent in roles such as consulting, supplying or education. Professionals across all sectors described themselves as knowledgeable about OEM repair requirements. Only a few said their understanding was limited. Many identified as very knowledgeable or somewhat knowledgeable and emphasised the value of OEM certification. Still, confidence in the rules did not translate into consistent application.
As one insurance professional put it, “We know the OEM procedures. The issue is access and practicality. Some repairs can’t even start because we can’t verify the required steps across multiple OEMs.” A professional working in a collision repair facility echoed that frustration, saying they “spend too much time proving procedures that should be understood industry-wide.”
One collision repair professional said, “Simplify access to OEM documentation. Too many portals and too many logins.” Another said, “Uniform documentation requirements that insurers accept would save huge amounts of time and frustration.”
Insurance professionals raised related concerns. One said, “Consistent repair documentation from bodyshops would speed approvals.” Another asked for “more clarity on which procedures are mandatory and which are recommended,” noting that vague wording often leads to disagreements. Three issues came up most often: ADAS complexity, interpretation of OEM procedures and EV-related training and equipment demands. Calibration requirements were the most frequent point of tension.
An insurance professional said, “Better visibility on calibration requirements. They vary widely and sometimes feel unclear.” A collision repair professional added that “better communication with insurers regarding pre and post scans and calibrations” would prevent many delays.
EV-related training and tooling needs added further pressure. One professional said that “training is expensive” and that small independent facilities “need more help keeping up with OEM programs.”
Certification produced similar concerns. Those working in collision repair facilities described certification as essential but said its cost is often undervalued. As one put it, “The cost of certification is high, and without insurer alignment it’s hard to show customers the true value of certified repairs.” Another pointed to the combined weight of “staff training requirements, cost of certification, equipment and facility investment.”
Automaker professionals highlighted uneven treatment of their standards. One observed that “some follow procedures strictly, others treat them like suggestions.” Another said insurers “need more education about the importance of following OEM procedures for safe repair.”
Professionals working in consulting and supplier roles emphasised the need for coordination. One said, “More collaboration is needed between all parties. Everyone needs to understand the reasoning behind OEM requirements.” Another said, “Everyone needs to be on the same page — clearer OEM guidelines, more insurer education and better communication would benefit the client most.”
Overall, the survey points to structural issues rather than gaps in knowledge. OEM procedures are widely understood, but access to documentation is fragmented, interpretations differ between facilities and insurers and certification investments are not always recognised. Calibration work remains the most consistently disputed step.
OEM rules are clear. The challenge now is ensuring they are applied consistently across organizations, regions and repairs. The survey shows an industry aiming for a unified standard but still struggling to deliver it reliably on every vehicle.
