ASA-Ohio

The Automotive Service Association (ASA) has written a letter to Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee; and Rep. Norman D. Dicks, D-Wash., ranking member; urging them to reconsider the proposed career and technical education cuts within the proposed fiscal year 2011 Continuing Resolution appropriations bill, specifically those cuts to tech prep programs in the Perkins Career and Technical Education Act.

House Resolution 1 cuts funding for the Perkins Tech Prep program by $102.9 million and completely eliminates funding for the 2011-2012 school year, an 8 percent reduction in overall Perkins funds, and makes significant cuts throughout other education and work force development programs.

These programs are essential for vocational education and training for the automotive industry, and it would be a mistake for Congress to keep these specific cuts in the budget proposal.

To view the letter, visit ASA’s legislative website at www.TakingTheHill.com.

Bethesda, MD – Results of vehicle check-up events at community car care events across the country in April and October 2009 revealed that 80 percent of vehicles need service or parts, the Car Care Council reported today. The unsatisfactory condition of vehicles also reinforces the continued need for consumer education about the benefits of regular vehicle care, maintenance and repair.

An analysis of vehicle inspection forms, submitted from event coordinators in several states, shows that 80 percent of the vehicles checked during National Car Care Month in April and Fall Car Care Month in October needed parts replacement, service or fluids. For example, nearly one out of every 10 vehicles had the check engine light on. The top problem areas were motor oil, windshield wipers, air filters, belts and hoses and lights.

“Vehicle check-up events are typically the focus of community car care events sponsored by repair shops, parts stores or distributors in cooperation with local vocational schools, media, civic groups and others,” said Rich White, executive director, Car Care Council. “While these events are free to consumers and serve as community-relations builders, most aftermarket businesses who participate experience an increase in sales and customers as a result.”

When checking lubricants and fluids, the three top failure rates were: low, overfull or dirty motor oil at 32 percent; inadequate washer fluid levels at 23 percent, and low, leaky or dirty coolant at 23 percent; Transmission, brake, power steering and clutch fluids were also checked and had failure rates of 17 percent and below.

Approximately 15 percent of vehicles had front windshield wiper failures and 10 percent needed service to rear wipers.

At least one belt was reported as unsatisfactory in 18 percent of the vehicles inspected, and 7 percent required at least one new hose. New air filters were needed in 18 percent of the vehicles, while 7 percent needed new PVC filters. The check engine light was on in 9 percent of the vehicles.

Battery cables, clamps and terminals needed maintenance in 10 percent of the vehicles inspected, while 9 percent of the batteries were not properly held down. Eleven percent had either a green, dark or clear/yellow charge indicator light.

Improperly inflated tires were found on 15 percent of the cars and 12 percent had worn tread and were in need of replacement.

The Car Care Council is the source of information for the “Be Car Care Aware” consumer education campaign promoting the benefits of regular vehicle care, maintenance and repair to consumers. For more information, visit www.carcare.org.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, H.R. 4173, was signed into law in July 2010. One important insurance provision, included in the new law, was a requirement for an insurance modernization report to the U.S. Congress supported by the Automotive Service Association (ASA). The director of the Office of National Insurance is to conduct a study and submit a report to Congress on how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the United States not later than 18 months after the date of enactment.

Included in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was a requirement for the creation of the Federal Insurance Office (FIO). The purpose of the FIO is to review international insurance agreements and monitor the industry from a federal level.

The bill enlarges the scope of the Federal Insurance Office’s authority regarding all insurance types except health. The bill mandates that the FIO report back to Congress on the modernization and improvement of insurance regulation in the United States. The report to Congress will address the following considerations:

• Systemic risk regulation with respect to insurance

• Capital standards and the relationship between capital allocation and liabilities, including standards relating to liquidity and duration risk

• Consumer protection for insurance products and practices, including gaps in state regulation

• The degree of national uniformity of state insurance regulation

• The regulation of insurance companies and affiliates on a consolidated basis

• International coordination of insurance regulation

The study and report will also examine additional factors:

• The costs and benefits of potential federal regulation of insurance across various lines of insurance (except health insurance)

• The feasibility of regulating only certain lines of insurance at the federal level, while leaving other lines of insurance to be regulated at the state level

• The ability of any potential federal regulation or federal regulators to eliminate or minimize regulatory arbitrage

• The impact that developments in the regulation of insurance in foreign jurisdictions might have on the potential federal regulation of insurance

• The ability of any potential federal regulation or federal regulator to provide robust consumer protection for policyholders

• The potential consequences of subjecting insurance companies to a federal resolution authority, including the effects of any federal resolution authority – on the operation of state insurance guaranty fund systems, including the loss of guaranty fund coverage if an insurance company is subject to a federal resolution authority; on policyholder protection, including the loss of the priority status of policyholder claims over other unsecured general creditor claims; in the case of life insurance companies, on the loss of the special status of separate account assets and separate account liabilities; and on the international competitiveness of insurance companies.

The study and report will also contain any legislative, administrative or regulatory recommendations, as the director determines appropriate, to carry out or effectuate the findings set forth in such a report.

With respect to the study and report, the FIO director will consult with state insurance regulators, consumer organizations, representatives of the insurance industry and policyholders, and other organizations and experts, as appropriate.

At least one insurance industry organization has targeted the elimination of funding for this study. It is requesting that Congress pass legislation to defund the study of insurance to be conducted by the new Federal Insurance Office and repeal the mandate granted to the FIO to make recommendations to Congress regarding insurance regulation based upon that study.

While speaking with stockbrokers in London in November, U.S. Department of Treasury Deputy Secretary Neal Wolin spoke about the Federal Office of Insurance, stating:

“The Office will monitor for problems or gaps in insurance regulation that can contribute to a systemic crisis in the insurance industry or the financial system; gather data and information on the industry and insurers; and coordinate policy in the insurance sector.” Wolin went on to say that insurance power would not be limited to the hands of the insurance office: “The act does not provide the Federal Insurance Office with general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance. The states remain the functional regulators. Through the office, however, the federal government will work toward modernizing and improving our system of insurance regulation.”

The Automotive Service Association supported the creation of the Federal Insurance Office and is against repeal of the mandate granted to the FIO to make recommendations to Congress regarding insurance regulations. ASA encourages independent repairers to go to the ASA legislative website, www.TakingTheHill.com, to send a letter to their senators and representatives encouraging them to oppose efforts to eliminate funding of the Federal Insurance Office modernization study.

ASA members strive to improve the image of the automotive service industry by committing themselves to quality repairs and the best possible service at a fair price. The consumer’s complete satisfaction is the ultimate goal of ASA business. ASA-Ohio is an organization of professionals who own independent collision and mechanical repair shops. ASA-Ohio operates as an affiliate of the Automotive Service Association.

The Automotive Service Association (ASA) is largest not-for-profit trade association of its kind serving automotive service professionals. ASA‘s international membership base includes numerous affiliate, state and chapter groups from both the mechanical and collision repair segments of the automotive service industry.

Since 1951, ASA has been the leading organization for owners and managers of automotive service busineeses that strive to deliver excellence in service and repairs to consumers. Members of the association perform mechanical, auto body and transmission repairs, and can be identified by the red, white and blue ASA sign.

Code of Ethics
The owners and managers of automotive service businesses that belong to the Automotive Service Association (ASA) agree to adhere to a Code of Ethics. ASA’s Code of Ethics is the automotive service industry’s standard for professional business practices.