The Assessor Winter 2026 PDF - Flipbook - Page 25
based on a vehicle’s age or value.
Each has advantages and drawbacks,
but a clear, simple, and consistent
approach is essential. Any model must
remain anchored in what is “fair and
reasonable” – a concept central to
Coles v Hetherton.
The IAEA is not entering commercial
negotiations, but we do have a role
in providing an informed, balanced
perspective. Our responsibilities –
promoting and advancing the sciences
of motor vehicle repair and supporting
public education – underscore the
need for constructive dialogue.
THE CASE FOR MORE FLEXIBLE
PRICING ON OLDER VEHICLES
High repair costs on ageing vehicles
are driving avoidable total loss
decisions, reducing repair volumes,
and placing additional strain on
bodyshops across the UK. Many
vehicles could be repaired safely and
economically if pricing re昀氀ected their
age and value more realistically.
A more 昀氀exible approach could bene昀椀t
all parties:
1. MORE REPAIRABLE VEHICLES
Owners of older vehicles often face
repair costs exceeding the vehicle’s
market value. Age-based pricing
would make more repairs viable,
reducing unnecessary write-offs and
improving customer satisfaction.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
Premature scrappage has a
signi昀椀cant environmental impact.
Extending vehicle life through
repair reduces waste, lowers
manufacturing demand, and
supports sustainability goals.
3. FEWER UNNECESSARY TOTAL
LOSSES
Applying a single retail rate across
all vehicle ages frequently in昀氀ates
repair-to-value ratios, resulting in
total losses that could have been
avoided with a more tailored
approach.
4. SUPPORT FOR THE USED CAR
MARKET
Affordable repairs help maintain
the quality and availability of older
vehicles, strengthening the secondhand market and improving options
for cost-conscious consumers.
POSSIBLE APPROACHES: TWO
MODELS WORTH EXPLORING
The panel explored two potential
alternatives to the current pricing
structure.
OPTION 1: AGE-BASED SLIDING
SCALE
defensible standard for 2026 and
beyond.
A tiered structure applying reductions
as vehicles age, for example:
Both approaches aim to support
fair pricing, reduce total losses, and
maintain repair capacity.
• 0–3 years: Full retail rate
• 3–7 years: 25% reduction
• 7+ years: 40% reduction
For specialist services such as ADAS
calibrations or alignment:
• 0–3 years: Full rate
• 3–7 years: 15% reduction
• 7+ years: 25% reduction
Under this model, an eight-year-old
BMW might be priced at around
£59/hr – a realistic rate that supports
repair viability without undermining
quality.
OPTION 2: VALUE-BASED SLIDING
SCALE
Accident Express Group’s Wayne
Mason-Drust has proposed a banded
structure based on a vehicle’s current
value, ensuring repair costs remain
proportionate.
The PAV-Linked Banded Labour
Framework modernises how vehicle
repair rates are determined across the
UK accident repair market. Rather than
applying 昀氀at national rates, it aligns
labour charges directly with a vehicle’s
Pre-Accident Value (PAV), the most
accurate re昀氀ection of complexity, risk,
and economic viability.
This framework replaces subjective or
in昀氀ation-driven adjustments with an
evidence-based structure rooted in law,
market economics, and FCA Consumer
Duty principles.
It recognises that newer, high-value
vehicles demand greater investment in
technology, training, and compliance,
while older, lower-value vehicles
require cost-sensitive rates to remain
repairable.
By introducing 昀椀ve transparent PAV
bands with separate primary labour
and paint labour rates, the model
ensures fairness across insurers,
repairers, and consumers. It embeds
accountability through documented
assessment processes, supports
environmental goals by reducing
unnecessary write-offs, and restores
con昀椀dence in UK retail repair pricing.
The PAV-linked framework rebalances
indemnity, transforming the ABP Retail
Guide from a static reference into a
dynamic, proportionate, and legally
www.iaea-online.org/news/the-assessor | WINTER 2026 | THE ASSESSORS JOURNAL
IT IS NOT ABOUT “CHEAP”–
IT IS ABOUT “FAIR AND
REASONABLE”
We all recognise that operating costs
are rising – labour, energy, parts, and
technology. This discussion is not
about undervaluing the profession
or driving down rates. It is about
aligning pricing models with real-world
scenarios.
• Newer, technologically sophisticated
vehicles with strong residual values
warrant full retail pricing.
• Older vehicles with lower market
value require a more pragmatic
approach.
A practical example: many consumers
would not choose to pay a full ABP
rate of £261 for air-conditioning work
when reputable national providers offer
the same service for around £135. The
principle we must aim for is balance
– what is fair and reasonable in each
context.
A FINAL THOUGHT: TIME FOR A
CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION
No one bene昀椀ts when a repairable
vehicle is declared a total loss due to
misaligned pricing structures. Insurers
lose, customers lose, and repairers
lose.
By adopting a more 昀氀exible,
evidence-based approach, we can:
• Increase repair volumes
• Preserve industry capacity
• Improve customer outcomes
• Reduce environmental impact
So, is the ABP Retail Guide still
relevant?
Yes – absolutely.
But to remain effective, it may need
to evolve in line with today’s repair
landscape.
This is the moment for a balanced,
collaborative conversation – and for the
industry to shape a guide that works
for the future.
JOURNAL
The ABP 2026 Guide to Retail and
Non-Contract Charges is publicly
available via abpclub.co.uk/
publications
25
