Imagine trusting that your vehicle is being repaired with care — only to discover, months later, that it wasn’t done right.
You trusted your insurer. You trusted the shop they sent you to. But behind that handshake between insurance companies and Direct Repair Program (DRP) shops, there’s often a different agenda: profits over safety.
This is the second part of our blog series uncovering the truth about DRPs. In our first post, we explained what DRPs are and why they can be risky for consumers. Today, we’re showing you what happens when those risks turn into real-life consequences.
These are the stories of business owners, shop technicians, and — most importantly — everyday drivers whose lives were affected by a system built for corporate convenience, not customer safety.
Leif Hansen, owner of Leif’s Auto Collision Centers in Oregon, made headlines after taking a bold stand against GEICO — and the DRP model as a whole.
For years, Leif’s business operated outside the DRP system. He refused to cave to insurer demands that, in his view, would compromise repair quality and customer safety. GEICO, one of the nation’s largest insurers, allegedly retaliated with what Hansen and his legal team called “a systemic attempt to harm and discredit” his business.
GEICO reportedly steered customers away from Leif’s by telling them repairs would be delayed or not guaranteed.
The suit alleged antitrust violations, claiming GEICO leveraged its market power to suppress competition and enforce repair cost controls across independent shops.
Hansen’s suit highlighted insurer pressure to use cheaper aftermarket or salvaged parts — even in cases where OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) parts were critical for safety.
The Outcome: The lawsuit brought national attention to the risks of insurer steering and the coercive nature of DRP relationships. Though many details were settled confidentially, the message was loud and clear: body shops shouldn’t have to choose between doing the right thing and staying in business.
In 2015, a small Utah body shop — once part of Liberty Mutual’s DRP network — chose to exit the program after growing frustrated with insurer restrictions.
Soon after leaving, the shop claimed it faced direct retaliation, including:
Loss of customer referrals despite years of successful collaboration.
Increased scrutiny and audits from the insurer.
Negative remarks made to customers about the shop’s reputation and reliability.
This wasn’t a one-off. Across the industry, dozens of shops have reported similar patterns: leave the DRP, and the referral faucet gets turned off.
Why does this matter? Because shops that prioritize integrity and repair quality are being punished for doing the right thing. And customers — like you — are often caught in the middle, unknowingly being steered toward shops that may not have their best interests at heart.
Industry Implication: DRP networks sometimes function less like partnerships and more like control mechanisms, where shops are expected to conform — or face consequences.
