The Independent Glass Association is taking action!

North Carolina HB 356:
What You Need to Know and Why You Should Care

North Carolina Senate Finance Committee Opposition

IGA Advocacy in Action

The Independent Glass Association has filed formal opposition to North Carolina House Bill 356 unless the bill is amended to protect consumers, preserve independent shop rights, and address the real conflicts in the auto glass claims process.

HB 356 contains language modeled after the NCOIL-style auto glass legislation that has appeared in other states. While these bills are often promoted as consumer protection or anti-fraud measures, the practical effect can be much different. Instead of directly addressing insurer, TPA, and network control over claims, these bills place new restrictions and burdens on independent glass shops while weakening the tools shops rely on to protect consumers from underpayment, steering, and claim interference.

IGA supports reasonable consumer disclosures, proper ADAS calibration communication, and real anti-fraud standards. But HB 356, as written, goes beyond disclosure. It restricts post-loss assignment rights, creates procedural barriers before a shop can fully assist a customer, and fails to provide strong, enforceable protections against insurer or TPA steering.

The IGA supports fair, transparent auto glass claims practices, but not at the expense of competition, consumer rights, or small businesses.

Why This Matters to Independent Glass Shops

HB 356 would create the North Carolina Motor Vehicle Glass Act, but the current language raises serious concerns for independent glass businesses. The bill places new duties and restrictions on shops while doing very little to stop the claim-handling practices that continue to harm consumers and independent repairers.

A bill that limits independent shops while leaving insurer, TPA, and network control largely untouched is not real consumer protection. North Carolina consumers deserve repair choice, transparency, and fair claims handling, not another law that shifts power away from the policyholder and their chosen shop.
Key concerns for shops include:
  • Restricts assignment of benefits: The bill limits post-loss assignment rights, which are often one of the few tools shops have to challenge underpayment and protect the consumer's chosen repair.
  • Strengthens claim-channel control: Requiring claim or referral numbers before certain shop agreements can force consumers deeper into the insurer or TPA-controlled process before their chosen shop can fully secure the job.
  • Creates new shop burdens without equal insurer accountability: The bill regulates shop conduct in detail but does not equally address steering, network pressure, delayed approvals, short pays, or TPA conflicts of interest.
  • Weakens consumer choice protections: The bill includes right-to-choose language, but allows recommendations, networks, and claim explanations without strong anti-steering remedies.
  • Provides no meaningful private enforcement: Without a private right of action or strong mandatory enforcement process, violations may go unchallenged.
  • Fails to address TPA/retail conflicts: When a claim administrator or network is affiliated with a repair provider, consumers deserve clear disclosure before being directed toward that provider.
  • Sets penalties too low to change behavior: Small administrative penalties are unlikely to deter large-scale claim-handling abuse or systemic steering.

 

What Consumers Should Know

HB 356 is being presented as a motor vehicle glass consumer protection bill, but consumers should look closely at what the bill actually does.

When your vehicle glass is damaged, you should be able to choose the qualified repair shop you trust. You should receive honest information about calibration, safety, coverage, and repair options. You should not be pushed, redirected, delayed, or financially pressured into using a shop selected by an insurer, TPA, or glass network.


Consumers should understand that:
  • Your repair choice may be weakened: The bill does not go far enough to stop steering or claim-channel pressure.
  • Your chosen shop may have fewer tools to help you: Restricting assignment rights can make it harder for independent shops to challenge underpayment or unfair claim decisions on your behalf.
  • The claim process may become more controlled by insurers and TPAs: Procedural requirements can push consumers into insurer-controlled systems before their chosen shop can fully assist them.
  • Conflicts of interest may remain hidden: If the company handling the claim is connected to a repair provider, consumers should be clearly told that before any recommendation is made.
  • There may be little practical remedy if your rights are violated: Weak enforcement and no private cause of action can leave consumers with limited options when claim handling goes wrong.
  • Safety disclosures should not be used as a cover for claim control: IGA supports proper ADAS calibration disclosure, but disclosure requirements should not be packaged with language that limits consumer choice or independent shop rights.
You paid for your insurance policy. When you have a glass claim, you should remain in control of your repair decision. HB 356 must be amended to protect your right to choose, require transparency in the claim process, and hold all parties accountable; including insurers, TPAs, networks, and repair facilities.

Support IGA Advocacy

Defend Independent Glass: Amend HB 356 and Support the Future of Auto Glass in North Carolina

Step 1: Join the IGA Today

Step 1: Membership strengthens our collective voice and directly supports the fight to protect independent glass shops with the work the IGA is doing on these bills.

Join the Independent Glass Association

 

Step 2: Donate to the Advocacy Program

The IGA cannot support HB 356 as written

While we support reasonable measures that promote transparency and accountability, this bill must be amended before it can be considered fair.

HB 356 must be amended to:

  • Preserve lawful Assignment of Benefits (AOB) when voluntarily executed by the consumer.
  • Protect the consumer's right to choose any qualified glass repair facility.
  • Require clear disclosure of conflicts of interest.
  • Remove claim-control language that forces consumers into insurer or TPA channels.
  • Apply accountability equally to all parties.
  • Strengthen anti-steering protections.
  • Preserve fair payment and dispute rights.
  • Add meaningful enforcement and remedies.
  • Increase penalties so violations are not treated as a cost of doing business.
  • Protect ADAS calibration transparency without using it as a pretext for claim control.
  • Require accurate consumer notices before any recommendation or referral.
  • Remove language that shields violators from accountability.
The IGA is actively challenging the false and misleading claims of widespread auto glass fraud being used to justify this legislation.

What Happens Next

HB 356 is still active in North Carolina, and the motor vehicle glass language can continue moving unless lawmakers hear directly from the independent glass industry and the consumers they serve. The Independent Glass Association has already filed formal opposition to the bill unless it is amended, but that filing is only the first step.

IGA will continue working to educate legislators, identify the harmful provisions, and request amendments that protect consumer choice, preserve fair payment rights, and create real accountability for all parties involved in a glass claim. However, lawmakers also need to hear from North Carolina shop owners, technicians, employees, and policyholders who will be directly affected by this legislation.

 

Every independent shop should contact their Senator and the members reviewing HB 356. The message is straightforward: oppose HB 356 unless amended. North Carolina should not pass legislation that weakens consumer choice, limits independent repairers, or gives insurer-controlled claim channels more power over the repair decision.
IGA will continue to monitor HB 356, provide updates, and push for amendments. But the next step is public pressure. The more lawmakers hear from the people who live this issue every day, the harder it becomes to advance a one-sided bill under the label of consumer protection.

This page will be updated as these bills move through the legislative process. Check back frequently for hearing dates, testimony resources, and action alerts.