DISPELLING THE MYTHS

Much misinformation exists regarding the use of aftermarket collision repair parts or cosmetic crash parts such as guards, bonnets, grilles, bumpers and the like.

Myth 1. " Using cosmetic crash parts from sources other the OE manufacturers could compromise safety."

A Status Report conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in the US concludes, " Cosmetic repair parts irrelevant to safety."

"There's no merit to the safety questions that have been rasied about cosmetic auto crash parts from aftermarket suppliers. But there's a very big pocketbook issue associated with using repair parts from original-equipment suppliers - they cost a lot more than the aftermarket parts"

To read the report go to http://www.iihs.org/sr/pdfs/sr3502.pdf  "The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is an independent, non profit, scientific and educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses - deaths, injuries, and property damage - from crashes on the nation's highways."

Myth 2. "All cosmetic crash parts must comply with Australian Design Rules."

ADRs are national standards for vehicle safety, anti-theft and emissions. www.infrastructure.gov.au

ADRs do NOT apply to cosmetic crash parts such as guards, bonnets, grilles, bumpers and the like.

Myth 3. "Aftermarket suppliers are required to produce a Summary of Evidence to prove ADR compliance."

Circular 0-4-26 from the Administrator of Vehicle Standards is entitled " Application for Component Registration Number". The Corcular provides that the Administrator of Vehicle Standards will accept CRNs as evidence of compliance is Summary of Evidence subnissions. The Circular does not purport to create a generally applicable " compliance" procedure - it only applies to new vehicles - it is not relevant to the aftermarket.

Therfore, Summary of Evidence and CRNs are relevant to OE manufacturers (say Toyota) who make new motor vehicles but it is not necessary or possible to obtain a CRN for an aftermarket part.

Myth 4. "The use of aftermarket parts impacts on manufactuer's statutory warranties."

The following is an extract from ACCC Consumer Express - April 2005;
"Genuine or appropriate quality parts - The issue here is not who manufactured the part/s, it is whether the part/s are fit or appropriate for the purpose intended. If a part is non-genuine, but is interchangeable with the genuine part, could be seen as being fit or appropriate for the purpose and would therefore not void the manufacturer's warranty."

"Does the use of non-genuine parts impact on manufacturer's statutory warranties? - NO!!"