Montana Class Action Targets State Farm Scan Payment Refusals at Independent Shops

The suit argues that State Farm's conduct goes far beyond a single disputed claim. Plaintiffs allege a systematic, company-wide practice of undervaluing, reducing, or outright refusing scan reimbursements whenever a policyholder chose a repair facility outside State Farm's direct repair program (DRP) network.

Listen Now
0:00
0:00
Auto insurance news

State Farm Faces Montana Class Action Over Scan Payment Refusals

The suit argues that State Farm's conduct goes far beyond a single disputed claim. Plaintiffs allege a systematic, company-wide practice of undervaluing, reducing, or outright refusing scan reimbursements whenever a policyholder chose a repair facility outside State Farm's direct repair program (DRP) network.

The timing matters. Montana's Commissioner of Securities and Insurance had already put insurers on notice with an August 2024 advisory memorandum explicitly prohibiting this type of payment discrimination. Filing this lawsuit against that regulatory backdrop signals that plaintiffs believe State Farm continued the practice after being warned.

For Montana drivers, the stakes are concrete: pre- and post-repair scans verify that a vehicle's safety systems are functioning correctly after a collision. Refusing to pay for them is not just a billing dispute, it is, the complaint argues, a safety issue.

Who Is Suing and What They Say Happened

The two named plaintiffs bring starkly different perspectives to the case.

Lana Curry is a State Farm policyholder. She alleges the company undervalued, reduced, or refused to pay claims on her own vehicle, including refusing to pay for pre- and post-repair scans needed to confirm the vehicle was safe to drive.

Francis Cote is a former Montana chief deputy insurance commissioner, someone who spent a career on the regulatory side of these disputes. His situation involves a third-party claim: his vehicle was damaged by an at-fault driver who carried State Farm insurance. He alleges State Farm failed or refused to pay the full cost required to repair his vehicle to applicable manufacturer repair standards, and that this refusal specifically included pre- and post-repair scans. The result, the complaint states, was out-of-pocket expenses and uncompensated repair costs.

The pairing of a private policyholder and a former top insurance regulator as co-plaintiffs is notable. Cote's background lends the complaint an institutional credibility that is difficult to dismiss.

The DRP Divide: Why Where You Get Your Scan Matters

The advisory memorandum issued by Montana's Commissioner of Securities and Insurance in August 2024 described what a review of consumer complaints had uncovered. That review found a clear two-tier payment structure.

Scan performed at a DRP shopFull payment for pre- and post-repair scan
Scan performed at an independent shopReduced payment or no payment
Scan reimbursement rate comparisonHigher rates paid to DRP shops than non-DRP shops

This table reflects the complaint's core factual allegation. The advisory was blunt about what this means legally.

"Both instances above, these practices constitute illegal incentives or inducements to use DRP auto repair shops (also known as steering) and violate §33-18-224(1)(a)(ii)."

The advisory went further, warning that the same logic applies beyond scans:

"It would also be illegal if an insurer used similar tactics regarding other services, such as calibration. An insurer may not require a customer to use a specific auto repair shop, directly or indirectly, to receive coverage for a repair (a scan in this case) or a higher reimbursement rate."

In plain terms: if your insurer pays for a scan at their shop but not yours, that may be illegal steering under Montana law, regardless of what your policy paperwork says.

Montana's 2024 Advisory Memorandum and the Law Behind It

The August 2024 advisory memorandum sits at the center of this lawsuit. Issued by Montana's Commissioner of Securities and Insurance, it was a direct regulatory response to the complaint patterns regulators were seeing across the state's insurance market.

The advisory reminded consumers of a right they already had: the right to take their vehicle to any auto repair shop or location of their choice. It also reminded insurers of a prohibition they were apparently ignoring.

Specifically, the advisory states that insurers may not engage in any act or practice that intimidates, coerces, or threatens claimants, or that provides an incentive or inducement for a claimant to use a particular repair shop or location.

The statute cited in the advisory, and referenced in the lawsuit, is §33-18-224(1)(a)(ii) of Montana law. The plaintiffs allege State Farm's differential payment practice violated this provision directly.

For consumers in Montana who want to understand how their auto insurance obligations and rights intersect, knowing this statute exists is the first step to protecting yourself when a claim is filed.

What the Lawsuit Is Asking the Court to Order

The remedies sought in this complaint are broad. The lawsuit asks for:

  • A declaratory judgment ordering State Farm to pay Curry and Cote's damage claims in full
  • Complete compensatory damages and interest for all named plaintiffs and similarly situated class members
  • A judgment requiring State Farm to reopen and fully pay all automobile damage claims for necessary pre- and post-repair scans that were previously denied or reduced

That last item is particularly significant. A ruling requiring State Farm to reopen past claims would not just affect future policyholders, it would reach back and compensate drivers who already absorbed these costs without knowing they had legal recourse.

The class-wide scope means any Montana driver whose pre- or post-repair scan was denied or underpaid at an independent shop could potentially be included, depending on how the court defines the class.

The Save Max Quote Index, drawn from 3.3 million+ real quote requests, consistently shows that Montana drivers face relatively concentrated carrier choices compared to larger states. That market structure makes DRP steering allegations especially consequential, when fewer insurers operate in a state, the leverage they hold over shop selection is amplified. The SMQI does not show specific claim denial rates, but the concentration dynamic is relevant context for understanding why independent shops in states like Montana are particularly vulnerable to DRP-favoring payment policies.

Neighboring states have their own regulatory environments. Drivers in Wyoming and Idaho who use independent repair shops should check whether their states have issued similar advisory guidance on scan reimbursement.

What this means for you

If you are a Montana State Farm policyholder or a third-party claimant whose vehicle was repaired at an independent shop, review any claim where pre- or post-repair scan costs were denied or reduced. Document your repair invoices and request a written explanation for any coverage reduction. Contact Montana's Commissioner of Securities and Insurance if you believe your claim was handled inconsistently with the August 2024 advisory memorandum. A class action outcome requiring State Farm to reopen past claims could mean compensation for costs you already paid out of pocket.

FAQ

Can State Farm legally refuse to pay for pre- and post-repair scans in Montana?

Do I have the right to choose my own repair shop in Montana?

What is a DRP shop and why does it matter for my claim?

Who can join the Montana class action against State Farm?

What should I do if State Farm denied my scan claim in Montana?

About Aaren Ramon

Aaren Ramon is a Senior Analyst at Save Max Auto and owner of Elite Shield Agency. He covers carrier moves, regional insurance markets, and consumer-impact reporting from the agency-owner perspective. Read more from Aaren Ramon →

Edited by Taleah McGuire.

Methodology

This article is grounded in the source linked above. Save Max Auto data points referenced here are drawn from the Save Max Quote Index (SMQI), a proprietary instrument reflecting 3,364,317 real consumer quote requests submitted to savemaxauto.com. State and carrier rankings reflect the lifetime dataset; year-over-year shifts reflect a rolling 12-month window. The index is refreshed monthly. External authority figures referenced (NAIC, NHTSA, state regulators) reflect the most recent public data releases available at time of writing.

Sources

  • Primary source: Repairer Driven News, "Montana class action alleges State Farm systematically refuses to pay pre and post scans"