Consumer Choice is Not Optional, At Least It Used To Be
by Shannon Christian, AASPMN Collision Division Director
Those of us who run collision repair shops in Minnesota have all heard the same line: the customer has the right to choose where their vehicle is repaired.
It’s written into law, it’s repeated in training materials and it shows up in policy language. But if we’re being honest with each other, we also know that what’s written and what happens in the claim don’t always line up. Like a couple of months ago, when an insurer told our customer we sold to an MSO and were closed, so they needed to take their vehicle to the other MSO’s location across town. Or when Chelsie called in her deer hit and was told outright that the repair cost would not be covered if she came to our shop.
The way steering shows up today isn’t obvious. No one is usually told outright that they can’t use a certain shop. Instead, the pressure builds quietly. Approvals drag on. Estimates come back missing procedures we know are required. Supplements and reinspection get requested again and again. Customers start calling, frustrated, asking why nothing is moving. At some point, many of them are nudged – sometimes subtly, sometimes not – toward a different repair path because it seems like the only way to get their car back. That nudge might be moving the vehicle. That nudge might be disregarding certain repairs to save the customer out of pocket cost. That nudge is generally only beneficial to one party in this process and it is not the customer and not the shop.
From the outside, it might not look like steering. From the bay floor, it feels exactly like it.
Minnesota’s anti-steering laws exist for a reason. They were put in place because collision repair isn’t a commodity and never has been. A bumper cover today isn’t just a piece of plastic – it’s a mounting point for sensors, cameras and safety systems that we’re responsible for returning to proper operation. Structural repairs aren’t guesses. Calibrations aren’t optional. And documentation isn’t busywork; it’s how we prove the vehicle is safe when it leaves our shop.
What’s changed is that the claims process hasn’t kept pace with the reality of the work. Vehicles have gotten more complex, repair procedures more precise and liability more real. At the same time, approval processes have become more centralized and more rigid. When delays or selective denials start influencing where a customer feels they can repair their vehicle, consumer choice becomes theoretical instead of real.
We all see how this plays out. A customer comes in after an accident already stressed. They’re worried about transportation, work, family schedules and rental limits. When the claim stalls, the pressure doesn’t fall on the insurer – it falls on the shop and the customer. Eventually, the customer asks the question we’ve all heard: “Would this be easier somewhere else?” That moment is where consumer choice quietly slips away.
This matters, not just for our businesses, but for safety. The cars we’re repairing now are full of systems that don’t forgive shortcuts. Missed calibrations don’t announce themselves. Improper structural repairs don’t show up on the first test drive. If steering – intentional or not – pushes repairs toward speed or cost over procedure, the risk follows that vehicle long after the claim is closed.
As shop owners, we walk a fine line. We’re not lawyers. We’re not regulators. And we’re not trying to pick fights with insurers. But we are the ones responsible for the repair. Our role is to document what the vehicle requires, tie it back to manufacturer procedures and industry standards, and explain it clearly to the customer. When we do that professionally and consistently, we give the customer the information they need to make real choices instead of pressured ones.
In today’s environment, artificial intelligence and automation have crept in on replacing meaningful discussions, in-person inspections and phone calls. Technology was supposed to help the industry, but instead it feels like it is putting insurers and their profits far ahead of what used to be quality and taking care of customers. If you as a shop can’t press 0 to speak to a human, most of the time neither can a customer…Just more delay, more skirting around conversations that insurers do not want to have, and more pressure on the customer to cave in and the shop to comply.
That’s why this conversation matters now. When delays, partial approvals and selective denials become normal, it hurts everyone. Shops carry financial strain. Customers lose confidence in the process. Insurers face growing distrust and scrutiny. Nobody wins when the system relies on attrition instead of transparency.
Let’s face it, modern collision repair and the associated technology are evolving faster than the insurances’ understanding of the repairs required on it. Remember, the insurance companies were, in large part, responsible for many of the modern-day safety systems that are so rapidly evolving. They pushed to have features and technologies that would reduce injury and accidents, and it is working. It does seem that they’ve failed to recognize the challenges, complexities and even costs of what it would take to repair that same technology.
A healthy claims environment doesn’t require special treatment for shops. It requires clarity, timely decisions and respect for the repair process. Consumer choice only works if it holds up under pressure – when the repair is complicated, when the procedures are expensive and when the timeline isn’t convenient.
Minnesota already has the framework to support that. The challenge is making sure those protections mean something in today’s repair environment. Anti-steering laws aren’t anti-insurance. They’re pro-consumer, pro-safety and ultimately pro-credibility for the entire system.
Ensure that the Minnesota Department of Commerce is aware of any of the discussed situations occurring in your shop. Send a letter, send an email, file a complaint online, or have customers fill out the AASPMN steering form. It may not have an immediate impact, but if we all were to share our concerns and the concerns of our customers, it can have a lasting impact. Showing a pattern or business practice is much easier when everyone speaks up.
Speak with your state representatives and share how this is affecting not only you, but more importantly, the lasting impact on your customers. We all have stories that we can tell for days. We need to share them with the right people.
As shop owners and managers, we’re not asking for shortcuts or special favors. We’re asking for a process that recognizes what modern repairs require and allows customers to make decisions without being worn down by delay or pressure. When consumer choice is real, repairs are safer, trust is higher and everyone – drivers included – benefits.
Want more? Check out the April 2026 issue of AASP-MN News!