Basecoat reductions draw attention, ire of repairers

A recent ABRN article asking if a basecoat reduction is an unreasonable estimate adjustment generated a lot of interest and commentary from readers who vented on partial refinish deductions.

I edited the article after receiving a news release from the California Autobody Association (CAA) that said the “blend with panel” process does not save enough time to warrant a basecoat reduction, and may instead increase the time required to complete the process.

When a body panel is partially damaged but still repairable, it’s a common practice to refinish that damage by using a process called “blend within panel.”

The purpose of “blend within panel” is to keep the basecoat (color coat) away from adjacent panels to avoid either an unacceptable color match, or blending color into those adjacent panels at additional cost.

For example, consider a dent in the front of a door. After the door panel is repaired, feather-edged, primed, blocked, and re-primed, it may be possible to use the “blend within panel” technique if the primed area is still at least 18 inches from the back of the door. This technique entails color-coating the primed area, blending the color into the remaining undamaged portion of the door and then clear-coating the entire door.

The CAA said some insurers regard this instead as a “partial refinish,” which they believe allows them to take a deduction from the estimating software’s allowed basecoat refinish labor. This adjustment is commonly referred to as a “basecoat reduction.” Adjusters often explain this by saying, “you’re only painting half the door, we’re only going to pay half the labor.”

The CAA pointed out the flaw in that logic. If you want to read the entire article, click on the link http://abrn.search-autoparts.com/abrn/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=600720. While you’re reading, make sure you scroll down to the bottom to read eight comments from readers. As is often the case, the comments are just as insightful as the article itself. They come from the hearts of repairers who experience this runaround on a daily basis.

Here are a few nuggets from readers’ comments:
• “This is a good example of the fox running the hen house. Most insurance companies will back down from the deduction if you argue it.”
• “Our tests have shown that there is absolutely no labor savings with a blended panel and that in most cases, it requires additional labor and expertise.”
• “I agree the partial refinish or blend within panel is a farce, just a way to nickel and dime the shops.”
• “The insurance companies are always going to be able to suppress the body shops until we take back our industry.”