Editor's note: This article is a follow-up to “Crash Course: How Auto Technology is Changing Claims,” which appeared in the May 2016 issue of Claims.

Earlier this year, Claims readers were given special insight into advanced automotive technology, with useful and actionable information specific to the challenges of today's auto claims professional.

The article addressed the impact of technology such as sensors and cameras on repairs; dispelled the “malfunction indicator light myth” and how the limited scope of dashboard indicator lamps is no substitute for scan tool diagnostics or procedures such as calibration; and alerted readers to issues and misconceptions surrounding the post-crash handling of advanced vehicle systems, and the value of pre- and post-repair diagnostic scanning.

The article also discussed potential liability risks for insurers or repairers who fail to provide allowances to properly address vehicle safety and assistive technologies post-crash.

Majors take a stance

Approximately three months after the original story, five major automakers released position statements on diagnostic scanning as a requirement in the collision repair process of their respective vehicles. Each position varies in terms of scope and specificity, although the position statements are mostly broad in scope and collectively mirror the message and recommendations outlined in the earlier article.

FCA US LLC, formerly Chrysler Group LLC, released its “Scan Tool Position Statement” on June 9. Eleven days later, Nissan North America came out with its position statement on pre- and post-repair scanning. American Honda Motor Co. Inc. followed in mid-July with its version covering scanning and calibration requirements for Honda and Acura vehicles. Toyota Motor Sales USA released Collision Repair Information Bulletin No. 191 called “Scanning for Electrical System Faults” in late July, and Honda Canada Inc. released its position statement in August.

(The original equipment manufacturer scan position statements can be found at: www.oempositions.com.)

To ensure that all issues are fixed regardless of whether there is a code error, manufacturers are recommending a scan of all vehicles involved in an accident. (Photo: iStock)

A look at OEM scanning position statements

FCA US is requiring pre- and post-repair scans as a component of a collision repair regardless of visible damage severity. The document notes that diagnostic trouble codes “MUST” be tested for as such codes may be present if a “vehicle is in an accident or collision, even though the damage may appear minor.” It identifies additional circumstances of a collision repair which could trigger diagnostic trouble codes and require scanning, including battery disconnects, significant disassembly, interior trim removal and glass removal.

FCA US has also included a position on air bag squibs (initiators). In vehicles with multistage air bags that have been deployed, diagnostic scanning “MUST” be performed to confirm all squibs have been exhausted.

Nissan's “Pre- and Post-Repair System Scanning” position statement seems a bit more tempered than that of FCA US, taking the stance that all of their vehicles receive a post-repair scan following a collision repair. Although when it comes to a pre-repair scan, Nissan's position is less of a requirement and more of a recommendation.

While the document states that both pre- and post-repair scans are necessary in most repair situations, Nissan recommends a pre-repair scan “where appropriate,” and acknowledges that trouble codes can be present “even in cases where there are no identifier lights on the dash.”

Nissan also released several additional position statements on specific resets, calibrations and initializations. A position statement addresses bumper cover replacement guidelines on vehicles equipped with sonar.

American Honda has the most comprehensive position statement to date. In addition to diagnostic scanning, the three-page document addresses calibration, aiming, inspection and reset requirements. Honda doesn't simply state that scanning and calibration be performed in a collision repair, the manufacturer elaborates on the what, why and when. A section called “Background on Scan Requirements” explains why diagnostic scanning is necessary and the fact that dashboard indicators are insufficient and not intended for vehicle diagnostics.

American Honda's position is that all vehicles involved in a collision must have a pre-repair and post-repair diagnostic scan. According to the statement, “a collision is defined as damage that exceeds minor outer panel cosmetic distortion.” At first glance it appears that this definition is somewhat subjective. With a full read of American Honda's position statement, the insurer or repairer can create hard and fast rules to make the process less subjective. Based on other listed criterions, a vehicle with a small dent or scrape in an outer panel may still qualify for scanning. Same goes for inspection, calibration, initialization and aiming. So, read carefully.

The position statement of Honda Canada is essentially the same as that of American Honda, most notably the company name is changed along with a handful of descriptor words.

All Toyota, Lexus and Scion models apply to CRIB 2016-191 released by Toyota Motor Sales, USA in late July. Similar to American Honda and Nissan, the document states, “Not all (diagnostic trouble codes) illuminate a (malfunction indicator light).” The automaker “strongly recommends” a pre- and post-repair “Health Check” diagnostic scan be performed on every repair.

Per CRIB 191, “Toyota requires that repairers perform a 'Health Check' diagnostic scan if a vehicle has sustained damage as a result of a collision that may affect electrical systems.” This does not imply that the decision is a simple matter of personal opinion. In situations where the physical damage does not make it obvious that an electrical system may be affected, critical thinking skills should be used to make that determination. Specific vehicle equipment knowledge, proximity of sensitive components to the impact zone, original equipment repair manual information, training and consumer input factor into the process at times or in the aggregate.

Although some positions appear focused on collisions, it seems unreasonable to believe that the scope or spirit of these documents applies exclusively to vehicles damaged by collision. Many of the diagnostic trouble code triggering events happen with the removal and installation of components in the repair process and comprehensive losses can involve multiple vehicle areas and systems. It would be prudent to apply the information to comprehensive losses as necessary.

Note that the original equipment manufacturer position statements do not exist in a vacuum, but are one in a plethora of original equipment manufacturer documents and repair manual information. They are meant to be used in conjunction with, not in lieu of, other original equipment manufacturer repair information and industry best practices. In cases where an original equipment manufacturer scan position does not exist, one shouldn't infer that the procedure is unnecessary.

While manufacturers have recommended diagnostic scans for many years, the technology in today's vehicles makes them even more critical to verify all issues have been addressed. (Photo: iStock)

Manufacturers' perspectives

Eric Mendoza of Toyota's Collision Repair and Refinish Training, shared more about scans following his participation in an industry panel discussion on scanning and calibration at the NACE/CARS 2016 event in Anaheim, California, in August.

“By listening to the voices of our customers, we clearly heard their need to understand our perspective on diagnostic scans,” said Mendoza. “We responded with the release of CRIB No. 191, 'Scanning for Electrical System Faults,' to be a clear and specific reference for the repair decision makers who are face-to-face with our vehicles each and every day.”

Doug Kelly, CEO of Plano, Texas-based Collision Diagnostic Services, also participated in the panel discussion. “Most automakers have specified the need for post-collision diagnostic scans for years, typically buried deep inside the repair manuals. The recent OEM position statements have simply brought the issue to the forefront, in turn generating a much needed dialogue between insurers and repairers on the topic,” said Kelly.

When asked how he feels as the CEO of a company whose core business is built on providing remote scans and diagnostic services to the collision repair industry, Kelly added, “It's encouraging to see the sudden interest in the subject of diagnostic scanning and the industry should benefit by having greater clarity on when and why to scan. Ultimately, we must not lose sight of what is most important in the midst of all this recent attention, a proper diagnostic scan is absolutely essential to a safe repair for the consumer.”