Canadian Service Information Agreement Announced, AAIA Provides Analysis

BETHESDA, MD - October 1, 2009 - On the surface, the agreement between Canadian automakers and the National Automotive Trades Association looks appealing; however, as with the agreements that the car companies have pushed here in the states, once you dig into the details it clearly does not live up to its billing. Specifically, the agreement is not enforceable; provides no penalty for a car company that fails to abide by its terms; and does not address the key issues of concern to most repair shops attempting to effectively and affordable repair late model vehicles. These concerns include access to immobilizer systems, information coming off of telematic systems and the ability to download updates on to vehicle on-board computers.

AAIA also is concerned that the agreement puts into place a standard whereby all service information developed to maintain a vehicle is considered proprietary and fully controlled by the car company. This is a dangerous precedent which runs directly contrary to the concept behind right to repair which takes the view that the motorist who purchased the vehicle should be in the driver’s seat when it comes to determining where their car is repaired.

We are particularly disappointed that the car companies excluded AIA Canada from the negotiations. Since they are the largest aftermarket trade group in Canada, their exclusion demonstrates that the agreement was more for political purposes than to ensure that there is competition in the vehicle repair market. For a more detailed analysis of the agreement, please see below.

---

Overall, the problem with the Canadian Automotive Service Information Standard is that while it appears to commit the car companies to make information available, in reality it is a loosely worded document which is not legally enforceable and excludes areas of information, software and tools that are currently the most problematic for independent shops.

In addition and of major concern over the long term is the fact that the agreement attempts to proclaim that all repair information is proprietary and therefore provides full control of use of that information to the vehicle manufacturer. The aftermarket believes that service information used to repair cars is not proprietary and should be widely available to the independent service industry. While we are agreeable to pay the car companies for the distribution of the information, we are unwilling to concede that it is proprietary since it is made widely available to franchised dealers and their employees.

Other problems with the agreement include:

• Failure to provide independent shops with the ability to download the latest updates to operating systems known as flash reprogramming. This is key to completing many repairs.
• Failure to make available to independent shops the ability to reinitialize vehicle immobilizer systems following a repair. Since car companies are increasingly running many of their vehicle systems through the same computer responsible for security, shops must have the ability to initialize this computer after performing even the simplest of repairs.
• No recourse to aftermarket shops regarding price. Therefore car companies could price aftermarket shops out of the market for information and tools without any way for the aftermarket to take action.
• Exclusion of all repair information that is provided to dealers over hotlines. Much of this information is critical to independents obtaining the latest repair and diagnostic updates needed to provide effective repairs. Many of these might be safety related.
• Exclusion of all vehicle specific information. Much of the repair data is now becoming VIN specific including programming and re-initialization information. Without knowing the specific repair data applicable to a vehicle as identified by the VIN, a shop will find it difficult to fully repair many late model vehicles.
• Fails to provide access to information that comes off of a vehicle wirelessly through telematic systems. This information is currently directed to the new car dealer, providing them with a substantial competitive advantage in capturing post warranty customers and in maximizing the efficiencies of their service bays.
• Absence of any fine or penalty for a car company failing to meet its commitment under the agreement. In addition, there are extensive provisions that make it simple for a manufacturer to opt out of the agreement. Further, the agreement become null and void if legislation is enacted regarding service information availability.
• Absence of any independent arbiter to decide whether the car companies are meeting their end of the agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, a shop is forced to rely on a committee that is evenly comprised of the car companies and aftermarket to determine if a specific piece of information or tool should be made available.

The bottom line is that this agreement provides little of reassurance to independent shops that car companies will ensure availability of all of the service information, tools, and software needed to repair late model computer controlled vehicles. This is just the latest example of how the car companies continue to avoid coming up with a real solution to the service information and tool issue both here and in Canada.