Utah's New Aftermarket Parts Law: What HB 119 Actually Requires

Stop here before you share that social media post claiming Utah now bans aftermarket crash parts on insurance repairs. It does not. HB 119, which took effect in 2026, is a disclosure statute. The earlier draft circulating in committee would have required aftermarket crash parts to be of like kind and quality and given consumers a private right of action to sue when they weren't. That language was stripped before the bill passed. What survived is narrower: insurers must disclose, in writing, when they intend to specify aftermarket crash parts on your repair estimate.

The law defines "aftermarket crash parts" specifically. We're talking about non-mechanical exterior sheet metal and plastic — think fenders, hoods, bumper covers, door skins. Glass, sensors, cameras, radar modules, and mechanical components are not covered by this definition. If your insurer specifies a non-OEM backup camera housing or a third-party ADAS sensor bracket and doesn't disclose it, HB 119 doesn't reach that. Know the scope before you argue the statute.

Under HB 119, disclosure must happen before the repair begins. The insurer must identify each aftermarket crash part by name on the estimate and state that it is not an original equipment manufacturer part. Burying it in small print at the bottom of a 12-page supplement doesn't satisfy the requirement. The disclosure has to be clear and specific to each part.

Here's the practical problem: disclosure is not consent. The insurer tells you, you sign off on the repair because you need your car back, and then the shop installs a fender that doesn't fit flush and needs additional labor to force into alignment — labor your insurer won't pay for because the estimate is already closed. The statute doesn't hand you a private lawsuit for that outcome. What it does do is create a paper trail. That paper trail matters when you're building a diminished value claim, because a vehicle repaired with non-OEM parts routinely appraised at $3,000–$8,000 less than one restored to factory specification.

Utah doesn't have a statute on diminished value. Your authority is case law. In Hill v. Varner, 4 Utah 2d 166, 290 P.2d 448 (1955) — restating Metcalf v. Mellen, 57 Utah 44, 192 P. 676 (1920) — the Utah Supreme Court held that damages equal repair cost plus any loss in market value remaining after reasonable repairs. Aftermarket crash parts go directly to that second number. A door skin that telegraphs differently under light, a hood with inconsistent panel gaps, a bumper cover that loses paint adhesion at the edges — all of these suppress resale value. That suppression is compensable under Hill.

Note the warning baked into Hill: an owner who proved vehicle value by his own opinion walked away with $5. The court wants documented market evidence — actual dealer sales data, auction results, dealer inventory demand data, and all major book valuations cross-referenced together. That's the standard we build every appraisal to. This is a third-party claim — diminished value runs against the at-fault driver's insurer, not your own. Utah has no first-party DV precedent. If you're filing against your own carrier for DV, you're in unsettled territory.

You have four years from the date of loss to file a property damage claim under Utah Code §78B-2-307(3). That clock covers diminished value, total loss disputes, and repair deficiency claims. Don't let an insurer's slow-rolling eat your deadline. If your claim escalates, Utah small claims court handles disputes up to $20,000 under Utah Code §78A-8-102 — and roughly 50% of the cases we handle end up in court, litigated by our own in-house attorneys.

One question we get constantly: do aftermarket parts void my manufacturer's warranty? No. The federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits a manufacturer from voiding your warranty simply because an aftermarket part was installed — unless the manufacturer can prove that specific part caused the failure. An insurer or dealer service advisor telling you otherwise is wrong. If your transmission fails six months after a non-OEM fender repair, the manufacturer cannot point to the fender and void your powertrain warranty.

The caveat matters: if a non-OEM structural component is installed improperly and contributes to a subsequent failure, you may have a fight on your hands proving causation. That's a different problem — and it's one more reason why the HB 119 disclosure requirement has real downstream value. A written record that your insurer specified non-OEM parts, before the repair, is documentation you may need later. Keep every estimate, every supplement, and every written communication from your insurer.