When a Snapshot Replaces a Safety Check
by Ken Miller. AASP/NJ President
Every week, I hear about another claim that starts – and too often ends – with a handful of cell phone pictures.
A customer takes a few shots of the damage, uploads them to an insurer’s app and receives a quick estimate that seems to settle the matter. On the surface, it feels convenient. But convenience should never replace a real inspection when a vehicle’s safety is at stake.
Modern vehicles are engineering marvels filled with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), high-strength structural components, hidden sensors and intricate electronics. A single collision can compromise these systems in ways no camera can capture. Frame misalignment, microscopic fractures in high-strength steel or a shifted radar sensor simply do not show up in a photo. Yet, insurers increasingly rely on photos alone to write an estimate and tell a customer the car is safe to drive.
The problem is that most vehicle owners do not realize how much technology is hidden behind the paint. After their insurer’s “inspection,” they often assume the vehicle is road-ready. They may continue to drive a car with disabled safety systems or unseen structural damage, placing themselves and everyone on the road in danger.
The financial side of photo estimating is just as troubling. Quick-hit estimates almost always understate the true cost of a proper repair. When a shop performs a thorough teardown and documents the full scope of damage, the real cost can be thousands of dollars higher than the photo estimate. This is not a harmless mistake. It is a deliberate tactic, known as “anchoring,” in which the first number presented becomes the psychological baseline. By planting a low figure early in the process, insurers set an expectation in the customer’s mind that anything higher is excessive.
When the repairer provides a complete and accurate repair plan, that anchored number lingers. Customers who trust their insurer may begin to doubt the shop, wondering if the higher cost is padded or unnecessary. This tactic creates tension, undermines the repairer’s credibility and turns a routine claim into a stressful confrontation. The insurer can then position itself as the consumer’s defender, questioning legitimate repair costs that were never captured by the initial photo estimate.
A photo estimate is not a repair plan. It is a strategic starting point that favors the insurer by minimizing the perceived value of the claim. As professionals, we must make this clear to every customer. Document unsafe conditions, outline the likely hidden repairs and emphasize that only a full, in-person assessment can produce an estimate that reflects the real cost of restoring the vehicle to pre-loss condition. Explain how a low ball photo estimate is designed to influence expectations and why a proper repair plan protects both their safety and their wallet.
It is time for regulators and policymakers to recognize the danger of photo-only estimates. A quick photo may speed a claim, but it should never be the final word on whether a vehicle is safe to drive or what it will cost to repair it properly. Until standards catch up, our industry must continue to champion complete inspections, expose anchoring tactics and communicate the risks to every customer who walks through our doors. The safety of New Jersey motorists – and the integrity of the repair process – depend on it.
Want more? Check out the October 2025 issue of New Jersey Automotive!