Bodyshops and insurers both seek the best for customers, so why does it feel like a conflict?
When I first got into this trade, I was naïve. I thought working in collision repair was straightforward: fix the cars, treat the customer right, work as a team with the insurance company, and move on to the next. I assumed we were all on the same side—the shop, the insurer, the customer—united by a simple goal: getting people back on the road safely, with as little stress as possible.
What a life to look forward to! A job unified by a single purpose: an excellent customer experience.
Sign me up.
Reality hit quickly. Within a matter of months, I realized this industry—especially at the front lines between bodyshops and insurers—often feels more like a battleground than a partnership. That initial confusion I felt? It turns out I wasn’t alone. It’s almost a rite of passage for anyone trying to do things properly in a system that constantly pulls in opposite directions.
Shops are responsible for restoring structural integrity, following OEM procedures, documenting every operation and staying profitable in a high-overhead business. We get paid for what we do — but only if someone agrees to pay it. And more often than not, that “someone” is the insurer, who’s under pressure to control costs and settle claims quickly.
This isn’t a smear article. It’s an uncomfortable truth: our partner is pitted against us by the rules of the game. Why hate them for it?
Insurers aren’t staffed by villains. Adjusters and appraisers are often doing their best under rigid guidelines, internal metrics and limited authority.
They’re fielding a flood of claims, balancing company policy with repairer expectations, and catching flak from both sides. They’re often told what not to pay for—even when they believe the work is justified.
They answer to someone.
See what I mean? They aren’t out to get us. We’re playing the same game—just with different rules. Unity of direction? Unfortunately, not.
So here we are: one side pushing for safe, complete, documented repairs based on a world-class customer experience. The other side is bound by cost control and policy interpretation. Cue the tension. Ask any estimator or production manager and they’ll tell you — it’s not one big thing that creates the friction. It’s the constant pushback.
• Weld burn cleanup? “We don’t pay for that.”
• OEM research? “That’s included in repair times.” (It isn’t, by the way.)
• Chipguard removal? “Built into the labour times.” (Also incorrect.)
And when you explain—calmly, with documentation, photos and P-page references— you’re told: “We just don’t pay for that.” Or worse: “Push too hard, and we may rethink the relationship.”
You begin to realize the problem isn’t a misunderstanding or villainous behaviour—it’s the structure. The DRP model places shops in a position where their professional judgment is second-guessed, and insurers are set up to control the process without taking responsibility for the outcome.
No, I’m not being rude. It’s just a fact.
So—has the industry gone mad? Maybe. Or maybe it’s always been this way. Conflict is, unfortunately, built in. We aren’t truly aligned, even if the customer experience gives the illusion that we are. We’re reading from two different rulebooks, with different people to answer to.
This isn’t to say one side is wrong or the other is right. It’s just a reality check. It’s easy to feel like you’re walking into a battleground. It takes a bigger person to acknowledge the struggles on both sides and show respect for them. Let’s get into a mindset where we can still share a post-game handshake. I still believe the customer deserves more than a silent war behind the scenes. And while we may never fully fix the relationship, we can at least start by being honest about it.
The industry is changing faster than ever. If we don’t remember to drop our guards and treat each other with respect, we’ll only add to the chaos. We already face enough difficult situations every day. Let’s try to change the industry—one conversation at a time.
