Presentation by CAPA at CCIF Vancouver Jan/2003


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • As a consumer advocate, I have spent nearly 10 years working on this program in order to protect American consumers from a car company parts monopoly. Car companies spend millions of dollars to discredit aftermarket parts, scare consumers, co-opt body shops and intimidate state legislatures into protecting their monopoly with thinly veiled legislation to protect their monopoly. What is at stake here is the consumer protection inherent in a truly free and responsible marketplace. What the car companies and some body shops are attempting to legislate out of business an industry which is forcing them to offer competitive prices.
  • It is not uncommon for a car company to charge more for a simple stamped piece of sheet metal than something that requires complex assembly, has thousands of parts, and multiple operations including various buttons and controls, movement of tape into place, electronic programming and a fragile, sophisticated, cathode ray tube. This type of pricing is what happens when the product is controlled by a monopoly. Toshiba has many competitors forcing it to provide high quality at a low price, Ford does not.
  • CAPA process is quality systems management PLUS product certification PLUS constant factory monitoring Manufacturers must demonstrate and prove quality control procedures Ultimately, the quality of the end product determines certification
  • Equivalent is for radiator core supports
  • Beware of programs who say that they do things just like the car company. Here’s what we discovered about car company quality.
  • If the sampled parts comply with all of CAPA’s Quality Standards the manufacturer can apply a CAPA Quality Seal to that part – the final step in the certification process Any part that does not have a CAPA Quality Seal is not considered certified, regardless of how that part is listed in the CAPA Directory or other information sources
  • A short overview of each to include their general position, if there are challenges with each, what are the challenges and what can we do to address the challenges.
  • An effective quality standards program is impossible without input from the repairers themselves. “ If CAPA parts don’t work for collision repairers, then we’ve failed in our mission.”
  • Beware of programs who say that they do things just like the car company. Here’s what we discovered about car company quality.
  • Some of the most outspoken critics of the insurance industry, including --quite an unlikely event if there were something inherently wrong with the insurance industry initially funding such an organization.
  • Presentation by CAPA at CCIF Vancouver Jan/2003

    1. 1. When Quality Counts Not all Aftermarket Parts are Created Equal
    2. 2. CAPA Update for the CCIF <ul><li>Who We Are </li></ul><ul><li>Why CAPA </li></ul><ul><li>Program Review </li></ul><ul><li>CAPA’s Success </li></ul><ul><li>CAPA Responds </li></ul><ul><li>Aftermarket Parts Reform: The Real Future </li></ul>
    3. 3. Mission Statement <ul><li>CAPA is a non-profit, third party independent standard setting organization whose goal is to ensure that the market has a high quality, fairly priced alternative to expensive car company parts. </li></ul>
    4. 4. How We Got Here <ul><li>1970’s car companies stopped changing model designs each year </li></ul><ul><li>Independents began to produce alternative parts -- Like mechanical part competitors in the 20’s and 30’s </li></ul><ul><li>Collision repairers used these parts in record numbers </li></ul>
    5. 5. How We Got Here <ul><li>After repair shops created the market, insurance companies started including competitive parts on estimates </li></ul><ul><li>Then collision repairers started to complain about safety and quality </li></ul><ul><li>The insurance industry responded by creating CAPA in 1987 </li></ul>
    6. 6. Why CAPA? <ul><li>To protect American consumers from a car company parts monopoly and poor quality parts </li></ul><ul><li>Car companies spend millions of dollars to discredit aftermarket parts, scare consumers, co-opt body shops and intimidate state legislatures into protecting their monopoly </li></ul><ul><li>Not stepping in and working to break this monopoly will only lead to higher car repair costs and higher insurance premiums. </li></ul>
    7. 7. What Happens in a Car Parts Monopoly? <ul><li>A 1994 Ford Taurus hood costs almost $400 + $350 to install and refinish it. </li></ul>A TV/VCR costs around $250 and it plugs in for immediate use. <ul><li>Consumers Know There Is Something Wrong When: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>$600 will buy a Pentium 4 computer with color printer, 17” color monitor yet they have to add $300 to get a sheet metal quarter panel from Ford for $900 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>$500 buys a new refrigerator or a Chrysler hood </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. Questions to Ask About a Part Quality Certification Program <ul><li>Are the parts individually certified for quality? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the credentials of the certifier? </li></ul><ul><li>Is a fully accredited, independent test lab part of the process? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the certification process transparent and subject to public comment? </li></ul><ul><li>Does the program have clear and precise standards? </li></ul>
    9. 9. Questions to Ask About a Part Quality Certification Program <ul><li>Are the standards available to the public? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there a mechanism for consumers, repairers and other affected parties to be involved in the standard setting process? </li></ul><ul><li>Who oversees the development of the standards? </li></ul><ul><li>Are the parts continually inspected after initial certification? </li></ul><ul><li>Is the certifier involved in the marketing, sale or distribution of the product? </li></ul>
    10. 10. <ul><li>Does distributor listing govern CAPA certification? </li></ul><ul><li>Only CAPA determines certification </li></ul><ul><li>Neither distributors or insurers can decide if a part is to be listed as certified. </li></ul><ul><li>Distributors could list part as a CAPA certified part, but only the presence of the CAPA seal actually confirms certification. </li></ul>CAPA: Answering the Questions
    11. 11. Step 1:FACTORY APPROVAL <ul><li>A detailed review and audit of the factory and manufacturing processes </li></ul>   Inspection, quality control and operating processes are critically reviewed An independent body determines whether the quality processes and factory each meet CAPA’s 60+ point quality requirements
    12. 12. Product Quality Certification vs. System Certification CAPA = QS, Product Certification & Continuous Inspection Product Certification QS 9000 ISO
    13. 13. Why Factory Approval (Process Certification) is not enough for CAPA <ul><li>CAPA led the way in process certification by developing and requiring a factory approval process well before the popularity of ISO. </li></ul><ul><li>In mid 90’s CAPA eliminated facility audits in lieu of QS certification. Within 1 year CAPA was forced to reinstate facility audits. </li></ul><ul><li>Car companies have had similar problems, so they too are moving away from QS and migrating to TS 16949 which includes more control over the product. </li></ul>
    14. 14. Step 2:PART APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION <ul><li>Only after the factory has been approved can individual parts be submitted for certification </li></ul><ul><li>Part Approval is a Multi-Step Process </li></ul>    <ul><ul><li>When All Criteria are Met: Part Certified and Seal Affixed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Checking Fixture is Approved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Part Properties are Tested & Approved </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Part Passes Vehicle Test Fit </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. <ul><li>Checking Fixture Approved </li></ul>Holes: Properly placed Bodylines: Exactly match car company Datum Points: Set at all critical areas Mating Components: Checked against part Flush: Matches Master Gap: Matches master
    16. 16. <ul><li>Part Properties are Tested </li></ul><ul><li>Material composition </li></ul><ul><li>Coating performance </li></ul><ul><li>Thickness </li></ul><ul><li>Corrosion </li></ul><ul><li>Mechanical properties </li></ul><ul><li>Form and fit </li></ul><ul><li>Paint adhesion </li></ul><ul><li>Appearance </li></ul><ul><li>Adhesive and weld integrity </li></ul><ul><li>FastenersHardware </li></ul><ul><li>Quality Control procedures </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying markings </li></ul><ul><li>Test procedures are based on nationally recognized tests such as ASTM and SAE </li></ul>
    17. 17. Hood - Inner Skin Identified for Testing Welds, Weldments, Adhesives <ul><li>Part Properties are Tested </li></ul>
    18. 18. Complete destructive testing ensures comparability with car company service parts <ul><li>Part Properties are Tested </li></ul>
    19. 19. <ul><li>Initiated April 1999 </li></ul><ul><li>Dedicated Vehicle Test Fit Facility </li></ul><ul><li>Collision repair professionals perform tests </li></ul><ul><li>Part Passes Vehicle Test Fit </li></ul><ul><li>As of December 31, 2001 all CAPA parts have a vehicle test fit or equivalent </li></ul>
    21. 21. CAPA Test Fit Results <ul><li>1,907 Car Company Parts Tested. </li></ul><ul><li>50% (954) failed CAPA fit and appearance requirements. </li></ul>Car Company Quality % Failed # Tested Car Company 27% 227 Honda 39% 236 Toyota 41% 141 Nissan 47% 295 Chrysler 60% 440 Ford 65% 467 General Motors
    22. 22. What Does this Analysis Tell Us? CAPA Parts are equal or BETTER than their car company counterparts !! Pass 100% Pass 50% Fail 50% When compared to car company parts in the market, 100% of CAPA parts meet standards and only 50% of the car company parts meet the standards Percent Car Company Service Parts Meeting CAPA Standards Percent of Parts introduced as CAPA that meet CAPA Standards
    23. 23. <ul><li>The CAPA Quality Seal: The Final Step in Part Certification </li></ul><ul><li>Tamper Proof Design </li></ul><ul><li>Two Parts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Top part stays on part </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bottom part provides proof that a CAPA part has been used </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Bar coded for ease of tracking </li></ul>Each and every part has a unique number
    24. 24. CAPA Part Tracking Easy & Available to All
    25. 25. CAPA Part Tracking <ul><li>One Seal Number Can: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Confirm part certification. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide part history. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify lot, manufacturer and application. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CAPA’s parts database maintains all testing and inspection information on all parts in the program. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Bottom tab of the seal affixed to repair order or estimate provides permanent tracking of the part. </li></ul></ul>
    26. 26. <ul><li>Quality Systems Audits twice per year. </li></ul><ul><li>Dimensional, Appearance, and Quality Control records inspections on 70 - 80% of lots. </li></ul><ul><li>Random material testing, Vehicle Test Fits and studies. </li></ul><ul><li>Complaint investigations. </li></ul><ul><li>Annual Fixture and Weld Jig Verification. </li></ul><ul><li>Trend analysis on manufacturer, part number and other critical program elements. </li></ul>Step 3: REGULAR RE-INSPECTION AND MONITORING
    27. 27. Step 4: MARKETPLACE QUALITY MONITORING <ul><li>Complaint Program: Providing users with the opportunity for quality input. </li></ul><ul><li>Decertification Program: Keeping problem parts out of the market. </li></ul><ul><li>Recall Program: Removing poor quality parts from distributor shelves. </li></ul>
    28. 28. CAPA Encourages Complaints <ul><li>1-800-505-CAPA </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Written Form: Thousands distributed annually </li></ul>
    29. 29. Complaints Received 1995-2002 16,771,089 Parts Certified 00.05%
    30. 30. Percentage of Valid Complaints to Seals Applied
    31. 31. CAPA’s Success: What CAPA has Accomplished <ul><ul><li>Accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), as a standard developer. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Developed specific, enforceable, effective standards for metal and plastic body parts and lighting. </li></ul></ul>
    32. 32. CAPA’s Success: What CAPA has Accomplished <ul><ul><li>Dramatically improved the quality of competitive repair parts bearing the CAPA seal. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provided repairers with a means to reduce total losses and therefore repair more cars. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provided a high quality alternative to expensive car company parts. </li></ul></ul>
    33. 33. CAPA’s Success: What CAPA has Accomplished <ul><li>Secured one of the nation’s most accredited testing laboratories: </li></ul><ul><li>Entela, Inc., Grand Rapids, MI </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ISO/TS-16949 (World Automotive Standard):First accredited and issued first certificate. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>QS-9000 and Tooling & Equipment Supplement: USA’s leading Registrar. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>American Association for Laboratory Accreditation in Chemistry, Mechanical, Electrical, Metrology, Metallurgy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Product Certification for Automotive Aftermarket Parts, IT, Medical Devices, Machinery, Furniture, Appliances, Lab Equipment. </li></ul></ul>
    34. 34. CAPA’s Success: What CAPA has Accomplished <ul><ul><li>Brought collision repairers into the part certification process: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>CAPA’s Board is led by one of the nation’s foremost collision repairers. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>CAPA’s Board and TC include ASA, SCRS and other industry leaders. </li></ul></ul></ul>
    35. 35. CAPA’s Success: Industry-Wide Acceptance of CAPA <ul><li>Repairers and other parties are now stating that there is a need for a certification program </li></ul><ul><li>The ASA, the largest trade association of repairers in the U.S., has endorsed our model bill on a federal level which would require the use of certified parts </li></ul>
    36. 36. CAPA Responds: GM Report on 10 CAPA Parts <ul><li>CAPA regularly tests car company parts and we’ve accumulated significant data on GM parts: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall, 65% of 467 GM parts vehicle test fit failed to meet CAPA’s fit and appearance requirements. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>GM report implies that all Pontiac Grand Am hoods are made the same way. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>GM report did not indicate if their parts meet their standards. </li></ul></ul>
    37. 37. CAPA Responds: GM Report <ul><li>GM implies that CAPA parts are inferior because they did not match GM parts or specifications, yet when CAPA reviewed Pontiac Grand Am hoods, we found: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>55% Variation in No. of Adhesive Patches </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>105% Variation in Surface Area Covered </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>129% Variation in Minimum Weld Size </li></ul></ul>
    38. 38. CAPA Responds: Consumer Reports <ul><ul><li>CR supports the goals of CAPA. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CR applauds the changes CAPA instituted </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CR said CAPA should expand to cover bumper assemblies. </li></ul></ul>
    39. 39. CAPA Responds: CAPA’s Independence <ul><ul><li>UL stands alone only after 19 years of dependence on the insurance industry. UL gained this independence because regulations require UL standards. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CAPA has suggested similar requirements on a state level and the ASA has proposed federal certification standards. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CAPA is led by one of the nation’s foremost consumer advocates, Jack Gillis. </li></ul></ul>
    40. 40. Aftermarket Parts Reform <ul><li>CAPA has built a strong foundation </li></ul><ul><li>There is a tremendous opportunity to embrace and insist on true quality </li></ul><ul><li>Each industry segment needs to make a decision regarding CAPA and quality aftermarket parts </li></ul>
    41. 41. Aftermarket Parts Reform: Consumers Support Competition <ul><li>Center for Auto Safety </li></ul><ul><li>Consumer Federation of America </li></ul><ul><li>Ralph Nader’s Public Citizen </li></ul><ul><li>Consumer’s Union </li></ul><ul><li>All are on record in support of CAPA, its goals and/or aftermarket parts </li></ul>
    42. 42. Aftermarket Parts Reform: Collision Repairers Must <ul><li>Decide that they want to encourage competition. </li></ul><ul><li>Decide to use only quality parts. </li></ul><ul><li>Reject poor quality. </li></ul><ul><li>Look for the CAPA seal. </li></ul>
    43. 43. Aftermarket Parts Reform: Distributors Must <ul><li>Remember that they have the strongest influence on manufacturers </li></ul><ul><li>Decide That Quality Is Really Important </li></ul><ul><li>Communicate Decision in Buying Practices </li></ul><ul><li>Provide Choice in the Marketplace </li></ul>
    44. 44. Aftermarket Parts Reform: Insurers Must <ul><li>Develop mechanism that ensures that policy holders get the parts specified. </li></ul><ul><li>Monitor the use of parts. </li></ul><ul><li>Develop educational programs for staff. </li></ul><ul><li>Share importance with policy holders. </li></ul><ul><li>Promote your efforts. </li></ul><ul><li>Financially support independent certification </li></ul>
    45. 45. <ul><li>The Car Companies win in two ways: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>They can charge whatever they want for parts. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>As repair costs escalate and more cars are totaled, consumers are forced back into the market to buy another car. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>In addition: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No incentive for car companies to improve quality. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of choice negatively affects all parties. </li></ul></ul>What Happens Without CAPA?
    46. 46. When Quality Counts Insist on Genuine CAPA Parts!!