Evidence of the Texas Department of Insurance declaring itself powerless to help on claims disputes prompted a Harris County small-claims judge to grant a repairer’s request for information into State Farm’s estimating process.

Larry Cernosek, owner of Pasadena, Tex.-based Deer Park Paint & Body, suggested his victory might offer a playbook for other shops.

“The good thing is all the documents are in the case file and will remain there for our (industry’s) benefit,” he wrote to other industry members in an email Nov. 20 in anticipation of Harris County 8-1 Justice of the Peace Holly Williamson’s ruling.

Williamson had already granted requests for discovery into five other items this fall over State Farm’s objections. These involved State Farm adjusters’ training, the carrier’s labor rate calculation and its definitions of “reasonable and customary,” “prevailing rate in the market area,” and “pre-accident condition.”

On Dec. 5, she approved the remaining four items after receiving four letters describing TDI’s inability to resolve some fundamental auto claim issues.

Her order grants Cernosek’s requests for State Farm’s estimating profile on the claims at issue and information on the carrier’s inclusion of P-pages and manufacturer procedures into its estimating software.

“The court granted my full request, attached for all the Discovery, what a GREAT DAY,” Cernosek wrote to others in the industry Wednesday.

Cernosek’s experience also reinforces the message advocates of an OEM repair procedure bill conveyed to the Legislature earlier this year: The TDI says it is powerless to act unless lawmakers do.

Cernosek’s shop sued State Farm in August for $10,000 over allegations of tortious interference with a contract on five claims.

Deer Park alleged State Farm refused to pay a variety of charges, such as an additional $14 an hour for his sheet metal and refinish rates, $225 administrative and detailing charges, and operations like denibbing. Each claim was allegedly unfairly denied to the tune of between $1,031.35-$2869.47; altogether, they constituted more than $9,000.

One claim even involved his wife, Cernosek said. State Farm had called her and told her his shop was charging for unnecessary operations, he said.

“Defendant denies generally the material allegations contained in Plaintiff’s Original Petition,” State Farm attorney Michael Hupf (Brackett & Ellis) wrote Aug. 19 in an answer to Deer Park Paint & Body v. State Farm.

Contacted about the ruling on Thursday, a spokeswoman confirmed State Farm’s policy is generally to refrain from comment on pending litigation, and it had nothing further to share.

Cernosek said it’s possible that State Farm will simply tell the court it’ll pay the $10,000 requested in the suit, leading the judge to close the case before the discovery would begin. He said he’s been involved in other other cases which played out this way.

State Farm also requested information from Cernosek, and he replied he “would request the same.”

Requests for information

Here’s the case Deer Park made to Williamson on the items she approved and State Farm’s unsuccessful objections:

Granted immediately

DEER PARK: “What training each appraiser and/or work experience repairing a vehicle after an accident. This request has nothing to do with proprietary or business or trade secret information.”

STATE FARM: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, ambiguous, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’ s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of‘Plaintiff’ s claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.”

DEER PARK: “How does State Farm compute labor rates? Labor rates are set by State Farm without any documents to support the amount, I can’t go into a State Farm office and tell the agent how much I want to pay for a policy, how can they have the right to come to my shop and tell me how much-they are going to pay to repair a vehicle. There is nothing confidential about rate setting.”

STATE FARM: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, confusing, ambiguous, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.

“Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, pursuant to State Farm’s insurance policy language, State Farm determines the prevailing competitive price in a geographic market by a survey created by State Farm. The process for calculating prevailing competitive price is proprietary, and protected trade secret information that is not discoverable. State Farm further objects to this request in that it seeks information that cannot be disclosed pursuant to confidentiality agreements with third parties; more specifically, when repair shops enter their pricing information on State Farm’s survey website, they do so pursuant to State Farm’s agreement to keep the information confidential and not to disclose the information outside of State Farm.”

DEER PARK: “How does State Farm define ‘reasonable and customary’, ‘prevailing rate in the market area’, ‘pre-accident condition’ The form policy provided does not define any of those terms. The terms are used in State Laws for writing estimates so they need to be defined to write an estimate on a vehicle and handle the claims in this case. The information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiff’s claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.”

STATE FARM:

‘Reasonable and customary’: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, ambiguous, specifically regard to the request to ‘reasonable and customary’ in quotations with no reference to what source the request is referring to, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.

“Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, State Farm is unable to identify in what capacity Plaintiff is asking for definition of terms. To the extent applicable, please see the form policy that is attached here and the definitions used in that document.”

‘Prevailing rate’: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, ambiguous, specifically regard to the request to ‘reasonable and customary’ in quotations with no reference to what source the request is referring to, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.

“Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, State Farm is unable to identity in what capacity Plaintiff is asking for definition of terms. To the extent applicable, please see the a form policy that is attached here and the definitions used in that document.”

‘Pre-accident condition’: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, ambiguous, specifically regard to the request to ‘reasonable and customary’ in quotations with no reference to what source the request is referring to, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not “established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade’ secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.

“Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, State Farm is unable to identify in what capacity Plaintiff is asking for definition of terms. To the extent applicable, please see the a form policy that is attached here and the definitions used in that document.”

Granted after TDI letters

DEER PARK: “The profile of the estimating software is a vital part of the estimating process and the court needs to know the parameters of the labor times and parts. This does not make this an improper request or irrelevant. overbroad, confusing and vague. it has everything to do with writing a complete estimate.”

STATE FARM: “Defendant objects to this discovery request as improper pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant further objects as irrelevant, overbroad, confusing and vague.”

DEER PARK: “The P Page requirements are additional items or repairs that are required to repair a vehicle to pre-accident condition therefore important in the estimating process. This information is available to the public, the repair industry and the software companies to include in their estimating software.”

STATE FARM: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, confusing, ambiguous, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.”

DEER PARK: “How does State Farm include the manufacturers specifications for repairing a vehicle after a collision? The specifications of the manufacturer are important so the vehicle is repaired properly and safely to prevent further damage. This information is required to write an accurate estimate and be included in the estimate to put the vehicle in pre-accident condition per the Texas insurance Laws.”

STATE FARM: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, confusing, ambiguous, specifically with regard to the request for ‘manufacturers specifications,’ and overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects tothis request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.”

DEER PARK: “What requirements did State Farm ask the software company to include in the estimating software or file used in each claim for this case for writing the estimate. There is nothing confidential, proprietary, business information or trade secrets about anything when you are repairing a vehicle safely.”

STATE FARM: “State Farm objects to this request as vague, confusing, ambiguous, overly broad in scope and time, and therefore unduly burdensome, constituting nothing more than a ‘fishing expedition,’ in violation of the letter and spirit of discovery law in the State of Texas. Further, the request seeks information that is not relevant nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request seeks confidential, proprietary, business information and trade secrets. State Farm further objects to this request because Plaintiff has not established that production of State Farm’s confidential, proprietary or business or trade secret information is necessary for a fair adjudication of Plaintiffs claims as required by the Texas Supreme Court and Rule of Evidence 507.”

Images:

Larry Cernosek, owner of Pasadena, Tex.-based Deer Park Paint & Body, poses at left with a sign for his company. (Provided by Cersonek)

Harris County, Texas, 8-1 Justice of the Peace Holly Williamson. (Provided by Harris County Justice Courts)

A State Farm agent office is shown in October 2016. (jetcityimage/iStock)

The State Farm Northeast Zone operations center in Concordville, Pa., is shown April 10, 2011. (Micah Youello/iStock)