| ArizonaAll Arizona rules | Arizona has no rule on capping paint and materials. The closest protection is the unfair claims law: the insurer can't fail to try in good faith to settle promptly and fairly once liability is reasonably clear, and must promptly explain a compromise offer. It reaches only a general business practice, and only the Director of Insurance enforces it. Whether a low materials allowance breaks it is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The unfair claims rules apply only when the conduct happens often enough to show a general business practice. The text says it gives no private right to sue and provides only an administrative remedy through the Director of Insurance. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “A person shall not commit or perform with such a frequency to indicate as a general business practice any of the following:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear.” A.R.S. § 20-461, azleg.gov text, 2026 session update Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “A person shall not commit or perform with such a frequency to indicate as a general business practice any of the following:” “Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy relative to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.” A.R.S. § 20-461, azleg.gov text, 2026 session update |
| CaliforniaAll California rules | California bars capping paint and materials. The insurer can't offer or pay an amount for paint and materials that isn't tied to a method for figuring those charges that shops and insurers accept. Its own estimate also can't depart from its estimating software's standards and costs if that would leave too little for a proper repair. When it adjusts your estimate, it must show each change and what it costs. Section 758.6 took effect January 1, 2009; its text does not itself state a penalty or a right to sue. The text does not say which methodologies count as accepted by shops and insurers; that's a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. | Capping rule“Insurers shall not engage in capping. For the purposes of this section, “capping” means offering or paying an amount that is unrelated to a methodology used in determining paint and materials charges that is accepted by automobile repair shops and insurers.” Cal. Ins. Code 758.6, effective 1/1/2009 What the insurer pays“An insurer shall not prepare an estimate that deviates from the standards, costs, and/or guidelines provided by the third-party automobile collision repair estimating software used by the insurer to prepare the estimate, if such deviation would result in an estimate that would not allow for repairs to be made in accordance with accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike automotive repairs by an auto body repair shop, as described in this subdivision.” 10 CCR 2695.8, effective 1/1/2017 (Cornell LII copy) Related claim rule“The adjusted estimate shall identify the specific adjustment made to each item and the cost associated with each adjustment made to the claimant's shop's estimate.” 10 CCR 2695.8, effective 1/1/2017 (Cornell LII copy) |
| ColoradoAll Colorado rules | Colorado has no rule that names paint and materials caps. The insurer must pay all reasonable costs to repair the vehicle, including materials or parts, less the deductible, and base what it pays on a prevailing competitive price set by competitive bids, a generally accepted insurer method, or market surveys. You or your customer can file a written complaint with the commissioner. Whether a materials formula meets that standard is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The section covers any insurer that issues or renews a policy insuring real or personal property, not only auto, and protects both the beneficiary and the claimant. The general assembly directs that it be liberally construed. | What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “An insurer or its agent that issues or renews a policy that insures real or personal property shall:” “(e) Assume all reasonable costs sufficient to pay for the beneficiary's or claimant's repairs including materials or parts, less any applicable deductible or reduction for comparative negligence;” CRS 10-4-120, 2026 edition What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “An insurer or its agent that issues or renews a policy that insures real or personal property shall:” “(c) Pay for repair services and products based on a prevailing competitive price, as established by competitive bids, generally accepted insurer-based methodology, or market surveys that determine a fair and reasonable market price for similar services;” CRS 10-4-120, 2026 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “An insurer or its agent that issues or renews a policy that insures real or personal property shall:” “(b) Require that any estimate prepared by or for the insurer covering damages that are visible or evident at the time of inspection is adequate to restore the property within a reasonable time to its condition before the loss, in accordance with applicable policy provisions;” CRS 10-4-120, 2026 edition Related claim rule“(5) A beneficiary, claimant, or repair business may submit a written, documented complaint to the commissioner alleging a violation of this section.” CRS 10-4-120, 2026 edition What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “An insurer or its agent that issues or renews a policy that insures real or personal property shall:” “Promptly pay the cost of property repair services and products from any repair facility location that is within a reasonable distance, less any applicable deductible amount payable by the beneficiary or claimant according to the terms of the insurance policy, at no less than the prevailing competitive market price in the same geographic area;” CRS 10-4-120, 2026 edition |
| FloridaAll Florida rules | Florida has no rule on paint and materials caps. If the insurer settles from its own estimate, it must give the insured a copy; if it requires a particular shop, it must restore the car at no extra cost beyond the policy. Changing an adjuster's report to lower the estimate without a detailed explanation is an unfair claim practice, and a person harmed can sue after 60 days' written notice. Whether a materials cut qualifies is for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. 626.9743 applies to personal and commercial motor vehicle claims. Before suing under 624.155, the Department and the insurer must get 60 days' written notice, and no action lies if the insurer pays or fixes the problem within those 60 days. The 2025 estimate rules in Fla. Admin. Code 69B-220.201(3)(m) apply only to residential coverage, not auto. | Related claim rule“(7) Every insurer shall, if partial losses are settled on the basis of a written estimate prepared by or for the insurer, supply the insured a copy of the estimate upon which the settlement is based.” Fla. Stat. 626.9743, 2026 edition Related claim rule“(3) An insurer that elects to repair a motor vehicle and specifically requires a particular repair shop for vehicle repairs shall cause the damaged vehicle to be restored to its physical condition as to performance and appearance immediately prior to the loss at no additional cost to the insured or third-party claimant other than as stated in the policy.” Fla. Stat. 626.9743, 2026 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “3. Committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice any of the following:” “j. Altering or amending an insurance adjuster’s report without:
(I) Providing a detailed explanation as to why any change that has the effect of reducing the estimate of the loss was made; and” Fla. Stat. 626.9541, 2026 edition Related claim rule“(1) Any person may bring a civil action against an insurer when such person is damaged:
(a) By a violation of any of the following provisions by the insurer:
1. Section 626.9541(1)(i), (o), or (x);” Fla. Stat. 624.155, 2026 edition |
| GeorgiaAll Georgia rules | Georgia has no rule on capping paint and materials. On your customer's own claim, the insurer's estimate must be reasonable and enough to restore the car's pre-accident quality, safety, function and appearance. If your customer's written estimate shows repairs cost more, the insurer must respond within 15 days and either name a shop that will do it for its estimate or pay the difference. Whether a materials cut breaks this is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The estimate rule protects the insured on the insured's own policy. The unfair claims statute applies only when the act is flagrant and in conscious disregard of the law or frequent enough to show a general business practice (33-6-33), and the article creates no private right to sue (33-6-37). | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Any of the following acts of an insurer when committed as provided in Code Section 33-6-33 shall constitute an unfair claims settlement practice:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear;” O.C.G.A. 33-6-34, 2019 official release (public.resource.org copy) Related claim rule“The estimate prepared by or for the insurer shall be reasonable, and of an amount which will allow for repairs to be made in a workmanlike manner which would restore the damaged vehicle to its preaccident condition relative to quality, safety, function and appearance.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 120-2-52-.04, effective 4/18/1994 Related claim rule“If the insured subsequently shows, based upon a written estimate which he obtains, that necessary repairs will exceed the written estimate prepared by or for the insurer, the insurer shall review and respond within fifteen (15) days.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 120-2-52-.04, effective 4/18/1994 Related claim rule“The insurer shall either provide the insured with the name of a repair shop that will make the repairs according to the written estimate obtained by the insurer which are commercially acceptable and conform with industry standards, or pay the difference between the written estimate and the one obtained by the insured.” Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 120-2-52-.04, effective 4/18/1994 |
| IllinoisAll Illinois rules | Illinois makes it an improper claims practice for an insurer to try to settle for less than a reasonable person would think your customer is owed by setting unreasonable caps or limits on paint or materials when estimating vehicle repairs. It counts only without just cause and when done knowingly or often enough to show a persistent tendency. After a hearing, the Director of Insurance can order the insurer to stop, suspend its license up to 6 months, or fine it up to $250,000. Penalties come from Section 154.8. The text doesn't define "unreasonable" caps or give your customer a right to sue; how it applies is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. Separately, 919.80 requires the insurer's own estimate, on the insured's partial-loss claim, to be reasonable and enough for workmanlike repairs. | Capping ruleFrom a list that begins: “Any of the following acts by a company, if committed without just cause and in violation of Section 154.5, constitutes an improper claims practice:” “(j) Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable person would believe the claimant was entitled, by reference to written or printed advertising material accompanying or made part of an application or establishing unreasonable caps or limits on paint or materials when estimating vehicle repairs;” 215 ILCS 5/154.6, effective 7/1/2022 Related claim rule“The estimate prepared by or for the company shall be reasonable, in accordance with applicable policy provisions, and of an amount which will allow for repairs to be made in a workmanlike manner.” 50 Ill. Adm. Code 919.80, effective 7/22/2002 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “It is an improper claims practice for any domestic, foreign or alien company transacting business in this State to commit any of the acts contained in Section 154.6 if:” “(a) it is committed knowingly in violation of this Act or any rules promulgated hereunder; or
(b) It has been committed with such frequency to indicate a persistent tendency to engage in that type of conduct.” 215 ILCS 5/154.5 |
| IndianaAll Indiana rules | Indiana has no rule on capping paint and materials. The unfair claims law bars the insurer, as a general practice, from failing to try in good faith to settle promptly and fairly once liability is reasonably clear, and from failing to promptly explain the basis for a compromise offer. Whether a low materials allowance breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. An unfair claim settlement practice counts as an unfair or deceptive act only when committed with such frequency as to indicate a general practice. | Related claim rule“Committing or performing, with such frequency as to indicate a general practice, unfair claim settlement practices (as defined in section 4.5 of this chapter).” IC 27-4-1-4, Indiana Code 2026 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “The following are unfair claim settlement practices:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear.” IC 27-4-1-4.5, Indiana Code 2026 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “The following are unfair claim settlement practices:” “Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.” IC 27-4-1-4.5, Indiana Code 2026 edition |
| MarylandAll Maryland rules | Maryland has no rule on capping paint and materials. It's an unfair claim practice for an insurer to fail to act in good faith in settling a first-party property and casualty claim, meaning an informed judgment based on honesty and diligence, backed by evidence. A lawsuit over it under the Courts Article must first go to the Insurance Administration as a complaint. Whether a materials cut is bad faith is a question for the Insurance Administration or a lawyer. The good-faith rule and the complaint process cover first-party claims under the insured's own property and casualty policy. The complaint-first step doesn't apply to small claims cases, when both sides waive it, or to commercial claims with limits over $1,000,000; attorney's fees awarded can't exceed one-third of actual damages. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “It is an unfair claim settlement practice and a violation of this subtitle for an insurer, nonprofit health service plan, or health maintenance organization to:” “fail to act in good faith, as defined under § 27–1001 of this title, in settling a first–party claim under a policy of property and casualty insurance; or” Md. Code, Ins. § 27-303, mgaleg.maryland.gov text in effect as of 10/1/2026 Related claim rule“In this section, “good faith” means an informed judgment based on honesty and diligence supported by evidence the insurer knew or should have known at the time the insurer made a decision on a claim.” Md. Code, Ins. § 27-1001, mgaleg.maryland.gov text in effect as of 10/1/2026 Related claim rule“A complaint stating a cause of action under § 3–1701 of the Courts Article shall first be filed with the Administration.” Md. Code, Ins. § 27-1001, mgaleg.maryland.gov text in effect as of 10/1/2026 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “A prohibited unfair claim settlement practice occurs if an insurer commits one or more of the following acts with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice:” “Fails to make good faith attempts to settle claims promptly, fairly, or equitably once liability has become reasonably clear.” COMAR 31.15.07.03, effective 1/26/2009 |
| MassachusettsAll Massachusetts rules | Massachusetts has no rule banning paint and materials caps by name, but it sets the method. The appraiser must itemize all parts, labor, materials and procedures needed to restore the car to pre-accident condition. For paint, paint materials, body materials and related materials, if your shop or the appraiser won't accept the dollars-times-hours formula, a published manual or other documentation must be used unless the two sides negotiate otherwise. The appraiser can't modify a published manual without first negotiating. These are licensed-appraiser rules; the shop side must be a registered repair shop with a licensed appraiser. The insurer may skip assigning an appraiser on claims where the loss, less any deductible, is under $1,500. The text doesn't say which manual or documentation must be used; that's a question for the Division of Insurance or a lawyer. | Capping rule“With respect to paint, paint materials, body materials and
related materials, if the formula of dollars times hours is not accepted by a registered repair
shop or licensed appraiser, then a published manual or other documentation shall be used
unless otherwise negotiated between the parties.” 212 CMR 2.04, mass.gov date 9/9/2008 What the insurer pays“The appraiser shall itemize the cost of all parts, labor,
materials, and necessary procedures required to restore the vehicle to pre-accident condition
and shall total such items.” 212 CMR 2.04, mass.gov date 9/9/2008 Related claim rule“The appraisers representing the insurance company and the registered
repair shop selected by the insured to do the repair shall attempt to agree on the estimated
cost for such repairs.” 212 CMR 2.04, mass.gov date 9/9/2008 Related claim rule“No appraiser shall modify any published manual (i.e., Motors, Mitchell or
any automated appraisal system) without prior negotiation between the parties.” 212 CMR 2.04, mass.gov date 9/9/2008 |
| MichiganAll Michigan rules | Michigan has no rule on paint and materials caps. As a pattern, failing to try in good faith to settle once liability is clear, or offering insureds substantially less than they are owed so they must sue, is an unfair practice. If an insured's claim is paid late, the benefits earn 12% simple interest from 60 days after the insurer gets a satisfactory proof of loss. Whether a materials cut qualifies is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. For a third-party claimant, the 12% interest runs only if liability isn't reasonably in dispute, the insurer refused payment in bad faith, and a court found the bad faith. 500.2026 excludes isolated incidents. | Related claim rule“If benefits are not paid on a timely basis, the benefits paid bear simple interest from a date 60 days after satisfactory proof of loss was received by the insurer at the rate of 12% per annum, if the claimant is the insured or a person directly entitled to benefits under the insured's insurance contract.” MCL 500.2006, effective 12/20/2017 Related claim rule“Failure to pay claims on a timely basis or to pay interest on claims as provided in subsection (4) is an unfair trade practice unless the claim is reasonably in dispute.” MCL 500.2006, effective 12/20/2017 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance, other than isolated incidents, are a course of conduct indicating a persistent tendency to engage in that type of conduct and include:” “(f) Failing to attempt in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear.” MCL 500.2026, effective 4/1/1977 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance, other than isolated incidents, are a course of conduct indicating a persistent tendency to engage in that type of conduct and include:” “(g) Compelling insureds to institute litigation to recover amounts due under an insurance policy by offering substantially less than the amounts due the insureds.” MCL 500.2026, effective 4/1/1977 |
| MinnesotaAll Minnesota rules | Minnesota has no rule on capping paint and materials. On your customer's own partial-loss claim, the insurer must pay all costs of a satisfactory repair, including hidden damage, or offer cash enough for one, and can't refuse any part of a claim with no good faith dispute. The sales tax law's labor-hours-times-rate method for paint and materials is a tax rule only. Whether a materials cut breaks the claims rules is a question for the Department of Commerce or a lawyer. The partial-loss rule applies when the insured is not an automobile dealer. The commissioner need not show a general business practice to act, but the text says no individual violation is an unfair practice for purposes of section 8.31. Section 297A.61 is a sales tax rule for the shop's invoice and says nothing about what the insurer must pay. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “the following acts by an insurer, adjuster, or a self-insured or self-insurance administrator constitute unfair settlement practices:” “if an automobile insurance policy provides for the adjustment and settlement of an automobile partial loss on the basis of repair or replacement with like kind and quality and the insured is not an automobile dealer, failing to offer one of the following methods of settlement:” Minn. Stat. § 72A.201, 2025 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “failing to offer one of the following methods of settlement:” “to assume all costs, including reasonable towing costs, for the satisfactory repair of the motor vehicle. Satisfactory repair includes repair of both obvious and hidden damage as caused by the claim incident. This assumption of cost may be reduced by applicable policy provision; or
(b) to offer a cash settlement sufficient to pay for satisfactory repair of the vehicle.” Minn. Stat. § 72A.201, 2025 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “The following acts by an insurer, an adjuster, a self-insured, or a self-insurance administrator constitute unfair settlement practices:” “refusing to pay one or more elements of a claim by an insured for which there is no good faith dispute;” Minn. Stat. § 72A.201, 2025 edition |
| MissouriAll Missouri rules | Missouri has no rule on capping paint and materials. An insurer's estimate must be an amount that can reasonably be expected to satisfactorily repair the car, and your customer gets a copy. On your customer's own claim, the insurer can't base a cash settlement on less than it would pay for repairs, unless your customer agrees. Whether a low materials figure breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Commerce and Insurance or a lawyer. Section 375.1007 applies only when the act is in conscious disregard of the law or frequent enough to show a general business practice (375.1005), and the director enforces it. The cash settlement rule doesn't apply to total losses. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Any of the following acts by an insurer, if committed in violation of section 375.1005, constitutes an improper claims practice:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlement of claims submitted in which liability has become reasonably clear;” RSMo 375.1007, effective 8/28/1993 Related claim rule“If an insurer prepares an estimate of the cost of automobile repairs, the estimate shall be in an amount for which it may be reasonably expected the damages can be satisfactorily repaired. The insurer shall give a copy of the estimate to the claimant” 20 CSR 100-1.050, effective 7/30/2019 (PDF) Related claim rule“The insurer shall not use as a basis for cash settlement with a first-party claimant an amount which is less than the amount which the insurer would pay if repairs were made, other than in total loss situations, unless the amount is agreed to by the insured.” 20 CSR 100-1.050, effective 7/30/2019 (PDF) |
| MontanaAll Montana rules | Montana has no rule that names paint and materials caps. If the insurer and your shop agreed to use an estimating system, the insurer can't on its own disregard a repair operation or cost that system identifies. It must pay the reasonable and necessary repair cost, but need not pay more than the market price: the agreed price or the local prevailing competitive rate. Whether a materials cut breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. 33-18-224 covers both the insured and a third party seeking repair. Under 33-18-242 an insured or a third-party claimant can sue for actual damages over listed claim practices, including the good faith settlement duty in 33-18-201(6); that right does not list 33-18-224. No general business practice has to be shown, the insurer isn't liable if it had a reasonable basis to contest the claim or amount, an insured has 2 years to sue, and a third party must wait until the underlying claim is settled or decided. The market price can't be less than cost. | What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “An insurance company, including its producers and adjusters, that issues or renews a policy of insurance in this state covering, in whole or in part, a motor vehicle may not:” “(iii) unilaterally disregard a repair operation or cost identified by an estimating system that the insurer and an automobile body repair business or location have agreed to utilize in determining the cost of repair.” MCA 33-18-224, 2025 edition What the insurer pays“(4) The claimant may use an automobile body repair business or location at the claimant's sole discretion, and the insurance company shall pay for the reasonable and necessary cost of the automobile body repair services for covered damages, less any deductible under the terms of the policy. This section does not require an insurer to pay more for automobile body repair services than the market price, as defined in 33-18-222.” MCA 33-18-224, 2025 edition What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “For purposes of 33-18-221, 33-18-223, and 33-18-224, "market price" means the:” “(a) price agreed upon between the insurer and the business; or
(b) prevailing competitive rate that is reasonable and necessary in the local area where the repairs are to be performed.” MCA 33-18-222, 2025 edition Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “A person may not, with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice, do any of the following:” “(6) neglect to attempt in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair, and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear;” MCA 33-18-201, 2025 edition Related claim rule“(1) An insured or a third-party claimant has an independent cause of action against an insurer for actual damages caused by the insurer's violation of 33-18-201(1), (4), (5), (6), (9), or (13).” MCA 33-18-242, 2025 edition |
| New JerseyAll New Jersey rules | New Jersey has no statute or rule banning paint and materials caps. 2007 Department guidance, which isn't law, says some insurers' paint and materials allowance methods were out of date, expects allowances enough to restore the car to pre-accident condition, encourages calculator manuals and programs, and says insurers must be ready to justify allowances. On your customer's own claim, the rules require good faith negotiation and a detailed written estimate. How this applies is for the Department of Banking and Insurance or a lawyer. Bulletin 07-20 (issued 10/25/2007) is guidance to insurers, not law or a rule, states no shop duty and creates no private right; the collection did not check whether the Department still applies it. The N.J.A.C. 11:3-10 text is the Department's own publication, which can lag the official Code. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Unfair claim settlement practices. Committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice any of the following:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear;” N.J.S.A. 17:29B-4, text through P.L.2026, c.50 Related claim rule“Negotiations must be conducted in good faith, with the basic goal of promptly arriving at an agreed price.” N.J.A.C. 11:3-10.3, DOBI copy, readopted 11/3/2021 (PDF) Related claim rule“If the insurer inspects the damaged vehicle or causes it to be inspected, the insurer shall promptly upon completing the inspection furnish the insured or the designated representative of the insured with a detailed written estimate of the cost of repairing the damage resulting from the loss, specifying all appropriate deductions.” N.J.A.C. 11:3-10.3, DOBI copy, readopted 11/3/2021 (PDF) What the insurer pays“Insurers are expected to provide repair allowances that are sufficient to restore damaged vehicles to their pre-accident condition. The use of available paint and materials cost calculator manuals and programs to determine allowances is encouraged to assist insurers in achieving consistent compliance.” N.J. DOBI Bulletin 07-20, issued 10/25/2007 (agency guidance, not a statute or rule) (PDF) What the insurer pays“As complaints are received by insurers and the Department, our Office of Consumer Protection Services will be conducting appropriate reviews during the market analysis and market conduct examination process. Insurers are expected to be prepared to justify their repair allowances.” N.J. DOBI Bulletin 07-20, issued 10/25/2007 (agency guidance, not a statute or rule) (PDF) |
| New YorkAll New York rules | New York has no rule on paint and materials caps, but it sets paint rules for the insurer's estimate. Each damaged item must show its paint, parts and labor hours, plus a separate paint-waste disposal line: your cost per paint hour times the estimated paint hours, capped at the local prevailing cost. The insurer can require your disposal manifest and invoice, and drop that line without them. Whether a materials cut is fair and reasonable is for the Department of Financial Services or a lawyer. 216.7 governs collision and comprehensive claims; under 216.10 its paint-waste and estimate-detail rules also apply to third-party property damage claims. The disposal cost can't exceed the prevailing cost in the area, and a new shop may use that prevailing cost in its first year. This text comes from the owner-approved LII mirror, not the official NYCRR publisher. | What the insurer pays“(4) The insurer's repair estimate shall include, as a separate line item, the reasonable cost for proper disposal of waste material generated by painting the motor vehicle or crash part, in the following manner (or using another method that is acceptable to the superintendent as functionally equivalent):” 11 NYCRR 216.7, effective 6/9/2021 (Cornell LII copy) What the insurer pays“(i) the cost per paint hour shall be calculated by dividing the repair shop's annual disposal fees for such waste material, after adjusting for reclaiming or recycling by the repair shop, by the number of hours expended annually to paint vehicles;
(ii) the reasonable cost for proper disposal of the waste material shall be calculated by multiplying the number of hours estimated to paint the vehicle by the cost per paint hour;” 11 NYCRR 216.7, effective 6/9/2021 (Cornell LII copy) What the insurer pays“(iii) presentation of the manifest and invoice documenting a repair shop's disposal and disposal cost for hazardous waste may be required by an insurer as a condition for this separate line itemization, and the failure of the repair shop to provide such documentation shall relieve the insurer from any consideration or inclusion of such disposal cost on an itemized basis within the repair estimate;” 11 NYCRR 216.7, effective 6/9/2021 (Cornell LII copy) What the insurer pays“Each item of damage must be detailed as to the paint, parts and labor hours it will require to repair that particular item.” 11 NYCRR 216.7, effective 6/9/2021 (Cornell LII copy) Related claim rule“(a) In any case where there is no dispute as to coverage, it shall be the duty of every insurer to offer claimants, or their authorized representatives, amounts which are fair and reasonable as shown by its investigation of the claim, providing the amounts so offered are within policy limits and in accordance with the policy provisions.” 11 NYCRR 216.6, effective 6/9/2021 (Cornell LII copy) |
| North CarolinaAll North Carolina rules | North Carolina has no rule on capping paint and materials. The unfair claims law bars the insurer from failing to try in good faith to settle promptly and fairly once liability is reasonably clear, and from failing to explain a compromise offer. On request, the insurer must give your customer copies of the original and all supplemental estimates. Whether a low materials allowance breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The unfair claims rules count only as a general business practice, and the statute says a violation creates no right to sue for anyone but the Commissioner. The estimate rule covers first-party claims the insurer covers and third-party claims where liability is established. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice of any of the following:” “Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear;” G.S. 58-63-15, ncleg.gov text through S.L. 2026-30 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “Committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice of any of the following:” “Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.” G.S. 58-63-15, ncleg.gov text through S.L. 2026-30 Related claim rule“An insurer shall, upon request, provide copies of the original estimate and all supplemental estimates to the claimant.” 11 NCAC 04 .0419, effective 10/1/2020 |
| OhioAll Ohio rules | Ohio has no rule on paint and materials caps. If your customer shows the repairs will cost more than the insurer's written estimate, the insurer must pay the difference or promptly name at least one shop that will do the job for its estimate. It can't use settlement practices that force first-party claimants to sue by offering substantially less. The rule gives no right to sue, but the Superintendent can recover a penalty through a consent agreement with the insurer. The estimate rule covers both first-party and third-party claimants, and the rule states that nothing in it creates or implies a private cause of action. A "practice" means conduct frequent enough to be routine; a single act isn't one, though a malicious, deliberate, conscious and knowing act can still draw corrective action from the Superintendent. Whether a materials cut breaks the rule is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. | Related claim rule“If the claimant subsequently claims that necessary repairs will exceed the written estimate, the insurer shall pay the difference between the written estimate and a higher estimate obtained by the claimant or promptly provide the claimant with the name of at least one repair shop that will make the repairs for the amount of the written estimate.” OAC 3901-1-54, effective 2/14/2022 Related claim rule“(10) An insurer shall not use settlement practices that result in compelling first party claimants to litigate by offering substantially less than the amounts claimed compared to the amount ultimately recovered in actions brought by such claimants.” OAC 3901-1-54, effective 2/14/2022 Related claim rule“Pursuant to section 3901.22 of the Revised Code and a consent agreement with the insurer, the superintendent may recover the cost of an investigation under this rule and/or a penalty from the insurer.” OAC 3901-1-54, effective 2/14/2022 |
| PennsylvaniaAll Pennsylvania rules | Pennsylvania has no rule on paint and materials caps. The appraisal must be written for the amount needed to return the vehicle to its pre-damage condition and must describe the repairs, including necessary painting or refinishing. The appraiser must review it with the shop your customer chose, or anyone else reasonably needed, to show the actual repair costs are covered. Whether a materials cut breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The unfair claim practices in 40 P.S. 1171.5(a)(10) count only when done often enough to show a business practice. Penalties for breaking the appraiser rules are in sections 5, 6 and 9 of the appraisers act (63 P.S. 855, 856 and 859). | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “(10) Any of the following acts if committed or performed with such frequency as to indicate a business practice shall constitute unfair claim settlement or compromise practices:” “(vi) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which the company's liability under the policy has become reasonably clear.” 40 P.S. 1171.5, amended 7/15/2024 What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “the appraisal shall contain a written disclosure which includes the following:” “(5) A description of repairs, known at the time of appraisal, necessary to return the vehicle to its predamaged condition, including labor involved, cost of all parts, necessary painting or refinishing and all sublet work to be done.” 31 Pa. Code 62.3, effective 10/23/1999 Related claim rule“(c) An appraisal for the repair of the motor vehicle shall be made in the amount necessary to return the motor vehicle to its predamaged condition.” 31 Pa. Code 62.3, effective 10/23/1999 What the insurer paysFrom a list that begins: “an appraiser shall:” “(3) Review the appraisal with an authorized representative of the repair shop which is selected by the consumer or with any other person reasonably necessary to demonstrate that the actual costs of repairs are adequately covered in the appraisal.” 31 Pa. Code 62.3, effective 10/23/1999 Related claim rule“(d) If an insurer prepares an appraisal of the cost of automobile repairs, the appraisal shall be in an amount for which it may be reasonably expected the damage can be satisfactorily repaired.” 31 Pa. Code 146.8, effective 12/16/1978 |
| TennesseeAll Tennessee rules | Tennessee has no rule on capping paint and materials. On your customer's own claim, the insurer's estimate must be reasonable and enough for workmanlike repairs. If your customer's higher written estimate leaves a gap that isn't resolved during repair or negotiation, the insurer must pay the difference or promptly name at least one shop that will do the job for its estimate. Whether a low materials figure breaks this is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. The rule covers partial losses on the insured's own policy. The named shop can be anywhere near the local market area, including the closest major metropolitan areas in or out of state, and only has to match the insurer's estimate, not the cost of supplemental repairs found during the job. Tennessee's codified statutes aren't in this collection, so only the Department's rules are quoted. | Related claim rule“The estimate prepared by or for the insurer shall be reasonable, in accordance with applicable policy provisions, and of an amount which will allow for repairs to be made in a workmanlike manner.” Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0780-01-05-.09, effective 10/9/2017 (PDF) Related claim rule“If the insured subsequently claims, based upon a written estimate which he or she obtains, that necessary repairs will exceed the written estimate prepared by or for the insurer, and differences remain unresolved during the course of the repair or negotiation process, the insurer shall:” Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0780-01-05-.09, effective 10/9/2017 (PDF) Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “the insurer shall:” “Pay the difference between the written estimate and a higher estimate obtained by the insured; or
(b) Promptly provide the insured with the name of at least one (1) repair shop in areas proximate to the local market area, including the closest major metropolitan areas within or without the state, that will make the repairs for the amount of the written estimate” Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0780-01-05-.09, effective 10/9/2017 (PDF) |
| TexasAll Texas rules | Texas has no law on paint and materials caps. A required notice tells your customer they pick the shop and parts, but the insurer need not pay more than a reasonable amount. 2011 Department guidance, which doesn't mention paint or materials, calls it unfair to pay less than a reasonable amount for a like kind and quality repair, or too little for the maker to honor the warranty. Whether a cap breaks the law is for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. TDI Bulletin B-0026-11 (June 20, 2011) is Department guidance, not a statute or rule, and creates no right to sue. It speaks of repairs, parts and artificially low reimbursement rates, not paint or materials by name. Section 541.060(a) protects an insured or beneficiary and, by its own subsection (b), gives no cause of action to a third party claiming against an insured. | Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “It is an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the business of insurance to engage in the following unfair settlement practices with respect to a claim by an insured or beneficiary:” “(2) failing to attempt in good faith to effectuate a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of:
(A) a claim with respect to which the insurer's liability has become reasonably clear; or” Tex. Ins. Code 541.060, effective 4/1/2005 Related claim rule“BY LAW, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO SELECT WHERE YOUR MOTOR VEHICLE IS REPAIRED AND THE PARTS USED FOR REPAIRS. HOWEVER, AN INSURANCE COMPANY IS NOT REQUIRED TO PAY MORE THAN A REASONABLE AMOUNT FOR SUCH REPAIRS AND PARTS.” 28 TAC 5.501, effective 10/12/2006 What the insurer pays“It is an unfair claim settlement practice for an insurer to pay a claimant an amount for the repair of the vehicle, including parts, that is not a reasonable amount for repairing or replacing the property with other of like kind and quality, or is not sufficient to make the repairs necessary for the manufacturer to honor the vehicle warranty.” TDI Bulletin B-0026-11, issued 6/20/2011 (agency guidance, not a statute or rule) What the insurer pays“The Department continues to have concerns that setting reimbursement rates artificially low for specific motor vehicle repairs and parts that are used to make the repairs may lead to substandard repairs, which may also impact vehicle warranties.” TDI Bulletin B-0026-11, issued 6/20/2011 (agency guidance, not a statute or rule) |
| VirginiaAll Virginia rules | Virginia bans capping: no one may set arbitrary and unreasonable limits on what an insurer will allow for paint and materials. The insurer still doesn't have to pay more than the going rate similar shops in your area charge to fix the car to pre-loss condition. The Commission must investigate written complaints about this, including ones from a repair shop, with the insured's or claimant's written authorization, and the insurer answers for its third-party representatives. A violator is subject to the injunction, penalty and enforcement provisions of Chapter 2 of Title 38.2. Explaining the extent of the insurer's obligation to its policyholder or a third-party claimant is not a violation. | Capping ruleFrom a list that begins: “No person shall:” “Engage in the practice of capping. As used in this subdivision, "capping" means the setting of arbitrary and unreasonable limits on what an insurer will allow as reimbursement for paint and materials.” Va. Code § 38.2-517 What the insurer pays“This section shall not be construed to require an insurer to pay an amount for motor vehicle repair services or repair products necessary to properly and fairly repair the vehicle to its pre-loss condition that is greater than the prevailing competitive charges for equivalent services or products charged by similar contractors or repair shops within a reasonable geographic or trade area of the address of the repair facility.” Va. Code § 38.2-517 Related claim rule“The Commission shall investigate, with the written authorization of the insured or the claimant, any written complaints received pursuant to this section, regardless of whether such written complaints are submitted by an individual or a repair facility.” Va. Code § 38.2-517 Related claim rule“When an insurer prepares an estimate of the cost of automobile repairs, the estimate shall be an amount for which the damage may reasonably be expected to be satisfactorily repaired.” 14VAC5-400-80, effective 1/1/2018 Related claim rule“Offering an explanation of the extent of an insurer's obligation under this section to its policyholder or third party claimant shall not constitute a violation of this section.” Va. Code § 38.2-517 |
| WashingtonAll Washington rules | Washington has no rule that bars capping paint and materials outright. If the insurer prices materials from a database, survey, estimating software or benchmarks, it must tell your customer on request when and where the data was collected and which businesses supplied it, and explain in writing how material costs were figured. It can't cut a claim without a reasonable investigation, which can't rely only on a database, and if it pays less than your estimate it must give every reason. These versions of WAC 284-30-330, -380 and -390 took effect October 18, 2026; breaking them is an unfair practice. The data and cost explanations are owed when the claimant asks. Whether a particular materials cut breaks these rules is a question for the Department of Insurance or a lawyer. | What the insurer pays“(8) If an insurer uses a database, survey, estimating software, or benchmarks to account for either material pricing, labor rate, or both, and upon request of the claimant, the insurer must provide the claimant with the date the data was collected, where the data was collected from, and which businesses provided the cost data to the database, survey, estimating software, or benchmarks.” WAC 284-30-380, effective 10/18/2026 What the insurer pays“If requested by the claimant, the insurer must provide in writing how the labor and material costs and repair processes were determined and cite relevant policy language.” WAC 284-30-390, effective 10/18/2026 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “the following acts or practices of the insurer are hereby defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance, specifically applicable to the settlement of motor vehicle claims:” “(2) Unreasonably denying a claimant's estimate for repairs. If the insurer pays less than the amount of the estimate from the claimant's chosen repair facility, the insurer must promptly and fully disclose all of the reasons it paid less than the claimant's estimate” WAC 284-30-390, effective 10/18/2026 Related claim ruleFrom a list that begins: “The following are hereby defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices of the insurer in the business of insurance, specifically applicable to the settlement of claims:” “(4) Denying or refusing to pay claims in part or in full without conducting a reasonable investigation. A reasonable investigation may not rely solely on the use of a database, which includes, but is not limited to, estimating software and benchmarks gathered from one or multiple databases.” WAC 284-30-330, effective 10/18/2026 What the insurer pays“(b) If a claimant provides the repair estimate and the insurer, after evaluation of the claimant's estimate, determines it owes an amount that differs from the estimate the claimant provided, the insurer must fully disclose all of the reasons for the difference to the claimant.” WAC 284-30-390, effective 10/18/2026 |
