|
I am the Mechanical Repair Division Chair for the National Automotive Trades Association (NATA), a chartered Canadian non-profit association since 1947, representing some 5,000 independent repair businesses across the country. I would like to comment on the "Right to Repair" segment of your November 24 th broadcast.
First of all, after listening to the program one would be left with the impression that the term, "Right to Repair" means that independent auto repair shops feel they have the right to repair their customers' vehicles. While it may be true that repair shops feel that way, the term was actually coined in reference to the consumer's right to choose where they have their vehicles serviced. That freedom of choice is threatened when only the dealerships are able to perform certain repairs and services. Independent repair shops also become unwitting casualties as a result.
There were several references to some "auto dealers" making repair information available while others do not. This has nothing to do with auto dealers. The information and the decision whether or not to make it available to the aftermarket lies solely with the auto manufacturers. The only interest auto dealers or their associations have in this issue concerns the speculation around losing customers to the independent shops. Depending on whom you ask, you will get varying figures on how the total amount of automotive service business in Canada is divided between dealerships and the independent shops. All surveys indicate that dealerships have made gains in this respect in recent years.
The voluntary agreement in the United States that was mentioned refers to technical information Web sites with which 26 US auto manufacturers provide diagnostic and repair information to anyone who wishes to pay for it. In the case of 12 of those 26, subscriptions can only be purchased by US residents. There is no Canadian equivalent to these web sites - yet. This is what sparked the Right to Repair movement in Canada.
Perhaps it was just a slip of the tongue, but in the introduction of Hugh Williams of the Canadian Auto Dealers Association it was suggested that he speaks for the "Automotive Industry." The Automotive Industry is everyone working in any business automotive related. This includes automobile manufacturers, their assembly plants, franchised dealerships, independent repair shops and anyone else who provides products and services related to the automobile. CADA only represents franchised new car dealers.
Mr. Williams hinted that his members would prefer a voluntary agreement to legislation.
This is what our association has been saying all along. The fact is the manufacturers won't talk to us. They tell us to speak to their associations, and their associations tell us that they have no authority in the matter, as the decisions lie with the individual companies. We can only reach a voluntary agreement if all parties' start talking, and this has been our goal.
(SEE HEADLINES)
|
NATA TAKES VISTA TO OTTAWA The Vehicle Information and Service Tool Access (VISTA) proposal, an initiative by NATA, the National Automotive Trades Association to resolve the so-called Right to Repair issue was recently presented to the federal government. Rene Young, the national organization's mechanical division chair reports that a meeting held on October 1, 2007 with Industry Canada was very productive.
"NATA Executive VP Dale Finch, Director Victor Marciano and I met with Alison Tait, the Director General of Industry Canada's Automotive and Transportation Branch and three of her staff members. We found them to be well informed about the OEM information access problem, but were able to provide them with some insight about it they had not previously been exposed to," said Young.
The NATA delegation felt the meeting provided them with "a feel for Industry Canada's appetite for getting involved". No decisions were reached during the session, but it was agreed that more specific information concerning the service information access matter would be exchanged over the coming weeks.
"We explained to Ms. Tait that NATA and its affiliated associations seek a voluntary agreement with the OEMs, and all we are asking the government to do is help get the OEMs to the table so that we can present our VISTA proposal. We were left with the impression that Industry Canada would sooner support an industry-led solution than write legislation," observed Young. "Notwithstanding this, it would be premature for us to make any statements to that effect - let me just say we are optimistic," he added.
According to Young, following the delegation's return from Ottawa a letter was received from Honourable Jim Prentice, the Minister of Industry, accepting NATA's request for a meeting. The date and location for the meeting would be determined shortly, Mr. Prentice said in his letter.
Editor's Note: For more information on the VISTA initiative, and the accessibility of technical information from the various vehicle manufacturers, visit www.natacanada.ca
(SEE HEADLINES) |
EU Orders Major Carmakers To Provide Repair Information
September 14, 2007
BRUSSELS (Reuters) -- DaimlerChrysler, Toyota , General Motors and Fiat must give technical car repair information to independent garages, the European Commission formally decided today.
"The carmakers seem to have withheld certain technical information from independent repairers and have provided the rest in a way that does not meet their needs," the European Union's executive arm said in a statement.
The Commission's decision "places an obligation upon vehicle manufacturers to provide independent repairers with standardized access to all technical repair information," it said.
Violators face fines of up to 10 percent of annual turnover.
The Commission imposed rules in 2002 that were supposed to solve such problems, but they have persisted.
As long ago as February 2003, the Commission warned automakers it would act against those breaking the rules.
In Britain "the difference for a typical service job between independents and some of the highest priced brands of franchised dealers can be more than 120 percent", the Commission said, citing a study by Britain 's Department of Trade and Industry.
In Germany , dealer prices are on average 16 percent higher than those billed by independent repairers and in Spain the difference is 33 percent, the Commission said.
Beyond that, the refusal to supply information raises the possibility of driving independents out of business, the Commission said.
These days, independents need information from a company's Web site to do even basic repairs, the Commission said.
The decision is binding on the companies until May 2010, when the rule under which it was made expires.
Carmakers may keep anti-theft or performance-limiting information secret, so long as it does not prevent repairers from performing other work, the Commission said.
|
|
What's the Latest on Right to Repair?
NATA's VISTA initiative - there is reason for optimism.
Practically every trade magazine and other Auto Industry news outlet, whether online or in print has published articles about "Right to Repair" this year. The subject comes up at every Industry meeting. All parties with the means to spread the word have done a great job with the awareness campaign. Most automotive repair business owners are now aware of the issue, particularly (but not exclusively) in the mechanical repair segment of the industry.
The National Automotive Trades Association has been quietly working on this issue under the project name "VISTA" (Vehicle Information and Service Tool Access). The provincial and regional associations that make up NATA have written about it in their publications and on their web sites, so all of their respective members should understand what NATA's is doing and how it differs from the "Right to Repair" movement. In a nutshell, we have not abandoned the goal of reaching a voluntary agreement between the OEMs and the aftermarket.
Let's be clear about one thing.if legislation came down tomorrow that forced the OEMs to provide their diagnostic and repair information to the aftermarket, NATA would not object. In the absence of a better deal, that would have to do. But we believe there is an opportunity to create something better than what we could hope legislation would accomplish.
While we have not altered our goal, we have learned many things over the last year or so. We have spoken with representatives of the OEMs, members of provincial and federal governments, other automotive associations here in Canada and in the US, and of course, our own members. The greater our understanding of the situation at home and in the US, the more we are able to fine tune our approach.
A year ago we thought that if we could just get the US OEM technical information web sites that don't accept Canadian registrations to open to Canada, our job would be done. And while that too would be better than nothing, we now believe we can achieve a made-in-Canada solution that works much better, and for all parties.
We can take the best parts of the (US) NASTF system and build on it. We can do things they say they would now do if they had a chance to start over. We can include things that give the OEM's a reason to do it.
You see, we must also consider the OEMs' point of view. They have not seen a business model that gives them reason to change their position. It can't be only good for the aftermarket - it must also be good for them. "Negotiation" means both sides offering concessions to the other. What concessions have "Right to Repair" proponents offered the OEMs? All the OEMs see are organizations made up of their competitors asking the government to force them to hand over their information. Why would the OEMs submit to that without a fight? What's in it for them?
NATA does not represent parts manufacturers, wholesalers and distributors. We represent you, the grass-roots repairers. We are not the OEMs' competition. We are their partners in customer satisfaction. We are their wholesale customers too.
Without tipping our entire hand here, let me just say that NATA has prepared a proposal that we believe addresses the concerns of all parties. We believe the OEMs will see it as a workable solution. For that matter, so will the government. All we want is an opportunity to present it, and it appears that opportunity may come sooner than later. Stay tuned for further developments, and thank you for your support.
(SEE HEADLINES)
|
NATA's Alternative to "Right to Repair"
VISTA
(Vehicle Information & Service Tool Access)
On the issue commonly known as "Right to Repair," th e Hamilton District Autobody Repair Association , along with its fellow NATA-Canada member provincial associations is working hard on behalf of the independent auto repair industry to secure access to auto makers' diagnostic and repair information in Canada. NATA has not given up on an industry-led solution. In fact, rather than just tabling our grievances against the auto manufacturers, NATA actually has a solution to offer. We don't believe government intervention is the best answer, largely because of the length of time it could take to see the light of day. We don't have that much time - vehicles for which information, tools and software are difficult or impossible to obtain are hitting independent shops now! For more information, please visit natacanada.ca
(SEE HEADLINES) |
For Your Information -
Florida Legislature Opts Not To Pass Right to Repair Legislation
Florida state Senate Bill 2890, the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act, has died in the Florida legislature. Since Senate Bill 2890 never made it through the committee process, it was unable to reach the Senate floor for a vote this session. In the past, the Automotive Service Association (ASA) has urged Florida repair shop owners to contact their state Senate members, asking that they oppose Senate Bill 2890.
ASA Submits Testimony in Opposition to Maine
Right to Repair Legislation
The Automotive Service Association (ASA) submitted testimony this week in Maine to express ASA's strong opposition to The Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act, ME LD 1210. In the past, ASA has presented testimony before the U.S. Congress in opposition to federal right to repair legislation. Ron Pyle, ASA president, testified before the Maine Legislature's Joint Committee on Business, Research and Economic Development. ASA believes this legislation would put at risk the progress that has been made through the Automotive Service Association-Automaker Agreement, which already provides independent repairers access to service, tool and training information.
(SEE HEADLINES)
|
|
In My Estimation, Right to Repair Issue Isn't
Really About Consumers
By Cindy Macdonald
The Right to Repair issue is on the front burner again. In the U.S. it has resurfaced in various state legislatures, while in Canada it is being vigorously pursued by two groups, headed along different paths toward similar goals. The National Automotive Trades Association (NATA) is working toward an industry-led voluntary agreement that will ensure the independent repair sector has access to service information. The Automotive Industries Association of Canada (AIA) says it has exhausted the voluntary approach, and is now lobbying the industry and politicians to prompt a legislative or regulatory solution.
This issue is fundamental to the future of the independent automotive repair sector, yet the catchphrase "Right to Repair" stems from the consumer spin that is often put on this issue. The rhetoric goes: The consumer has the right to choose where his/her vehicle will be repaired. It continues: If auto manufacturers limit access to service information and special tools (such as diagnostic and flash codes), and these are not readily available to independent repair facilities, then consumers are limited in their choice.
Here, talking among ourselves, let's not candy coat the issue. The reality is that if independent collision repair centres and auto service providers do not have equal access to service information, they are at a competitive disadvantage.
This spring, as the Right to Repair issue moved more blatantly into the political sphere, prodded by AIA, the competitive aspect was recognized but cloaked under the guise of consumer and environmental concerns.
Brian Masse, Member of Parliament (Windsor West) and NDP Industry and Border Critic, introduced a private member bill that calls for the "consumer's right to repair" to be safeguarded by proposing changes to the Competition Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. (Read more about Masse's bill on Bodyshopbiz.com).
It is the proliferation of computer-controlled sensors and systems, plus the exotic materials, that make the access (or lack thereof) to software and tools such an issue now. In many cases, the dealers' stranglehold on this data makes your relationship with local dealer service departments a point of vulnerability.
As John Scissons, executive vice-president of NATA, stated in Collision Quarterly magazine: "What if your relationship with the local dealer's parts and service department soured to the point where they no longer cooperated with you?
"What if, due to the resulting frustrations, your technicians decided to simplify their lives and go to work at the dealership, or get out of the trade entirely?"
A list on NATA's web site shows that of the 26 auto manufacturers on the list, only 15 allow Canadians access to their service information web sites. Of the five largest manufacturers, only GM and Honda provide access to Canadians. Right now, these OEMs provide access by choice. Here's another scenario: What if they chose not to?
Join the dialog on the Right to Repair issue. Fill in the online petitions, write to your local MP, get the word out. For more information, petitions and resources, visit www.righttorepair.ca and www.natacanada.ca.
(SEE HEADLINES) |
NATA Canada Salutes Volvo Cars of Canada Corp.
NATA Canada representatives Dale Finch and Rene Young recently met with Michel St-Hilaire, Vice President, Customer Service of Volvo Cars of Canada Corp. to discuss Canadian aftermarket access to Volvo's technical information web site and service tools. Mr. St-Hilaire expressed enthusiasm about the prospect of working more closely with the Canadian aftermarket through NATA Canada citing that, "We all have the same goal - looking after the customer."
Recognizing that Volvo owners in all parts of Canada have a choice in where and how to fulfill their vehicle's the service and repair needs, Mr. St-Hilaire embraces a spirit of cooperation with the independent automotive repair and collision repair industries and pledged his support for NATA Canada's Vehicle Information and Service Tool Access (VISTA) initiative.
Volvo Cars of North America LLC maintains a technical information web site, located at www.volvotechinfo.com where a variety of subscription types and durations can be purchased at reasonable prices for 1994 to present year models. It was reported earlier that this site did not accept registrations from Canada , but Mr. St-Hilaire assured NATA Canada that the site is, in fact, open to Canadians and will remain so.
NATA Canada would like to congratulate Mr. St-Hilaire and Volvo Cars of Canada Corp. for cooperating with the Canadian aftermarket automotive industry to ensure that Volvo owners will continue to enjoy the freedom of choice and level of service they have in the past.
------------------------------------------------------------------NATA is a federally chartered 58-year old organization, with current representation on the Board of the Canadian Automotive Repair and Service Council (CARS), along with the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association (CVMA), the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers of Canada (AIAMC), the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) and the Automotive Industries Association of Canada (AIA).
The National Automotive Trades Association of Canada currently represents:
Automotive Retailers Association of British Columbia (ARA)
Automotive Service and Repair Association of Alberta (ASRA)
Saskatchewan Association of Automotive Repairers ( SAAR )
Automotive Trades Association of Manitoba (ATA)
Hamilton district Autobody Repair Association (HARA)
Automotive Aftermarket Retailers of Ontario (AARO)
Collision Repair Association of Nova Scotia (CRANS)
(SEE HEADLINES) |
Box 25083, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 8B7
Tel: +1 (306) 220-6774 Fax: +1 (306) 651-3590
VISTA ISSUE POSITION
May 26, 2006: The following is the National Automotive Trades Association (NATA) position regarding Vehicle Information and Service Tools Access (VISTA) as provided by Glenn McNally of NATA in his initial proposal to the Automotive Aftermarket Retailers of Ontario (AARO) three years ago.
All automotive repair outlets serving the motoring public in Canada require access to service information and tools and training in order to provide necessary service to vehicles in a timely and cost-efficient fashion. Repairs to ensure that vehicles comply with provincially mandated safety and emission programs require that Canadian technicians have access to this information on a level consistent with their American counterparts.
Recent developments in automotive technology require that replacement components be programmed or initialized using information and equipment available from the vehicle manufacturer. The database listed at http://www.natacanada.ca lists manufacturer Web sites that provide PCM reflash and initialization data, service info, on-demand training programs and manufacturer-validated service tools. NATA seeks access on an equal level with our Automotive Service Association (ASA) counterparts in the United States, and would be prepared to enter into an agreement with OEMs here in Canada similar to the one that exists between ASA and the new car manufacturers in the United States.
NATA members wish to establish a voluntary agreement to provide aftermarket service providers with access to this information, in order that they may continue in their partnership with OE service provider outlets in providing the level of service the Canadian motoring public has come to enjoy and expect in the past. The service providers represented by NATA affiliated associations are more concerned with these needs than the issues being raised in the U.S. under the Right to Repair legislative effort. Right to Repair proponents appear to be seeking access to information that would allow aftermarket parts suppliers to acquire engineering information on replacement parts through legislation, versus diplomatic discussion, dialogue and agreed-to consensus.
For further information on this subject, please contact VISTA spokesperson Glenn McNally:
gmcnally@nastf.ca
416 460 4077 Toronto ON
http://www.natacanada.ca
250 412 7177 Victoria BC
The National Automotive Trades Association of Canada currently represents:
•Automotive Retailers Association of British Columbia (ARA)
•Automotive Service and Repair Association of Alberta (ASRA)
•Saskatchewan Association of Automotive Repairers (SAAR)
•Automotive Trades Association of Manitoba (ATA)
•Hamilton District Autobody Repair Association (HARA)
•Automotive Aftermarket Retailers of Ontario (AARO)
•Collision Repair Association of Nova Scotia (CRANS)
(SEE HEADLINES)
|
|
NATA's Vehicle Information and Service Tool Access (VISTA) campaign has some good news for the automotive aftermarket repair industry: If I am beginning to sound like a broken record, good! That means you've been paying attention. And well you should, because this is probably the most important issue the automotive aftermarket repair industry has ever faced. But I am coming to you with some good news. The tide seems to be turning. We have reason to be optimistic that a solution is on the horizon.
It may not come next month, or maybe not even this year, but our campaign is definitely gaining momentum, and may soon reach the point at which it is unstoppable. In order to explain, let me begin with a quick review.
In May, 2006, when I had just begun to work for the Automotive Retailers Association (ARA), it was reported that out of the twenty-seven OEM technical information Web sites set up under the requirements of US EPA regulations and the Automotive Service Association (ASA)/automaker agreement, twenty-one did not accept subscription registrations from Canada. It was determined that there was a general unwillingness among the Canadian offices of those 21 OEMs to allow their US counterparts to make the Web sites available to Canadians, or to provide any alternative means by which the aftermarket could obtain their service and repair information. Some have flat-out stated that they consider this information to be "proprietary in nature."
Over the summer of 2006, NATA launched its "VISTA" initiative, beginning with an industry awareness campaign. This campaign took the form of a new Web site for NATA Canada (www.natacanada.ca), a brochure distributed to repair businesses, and articles in publications like this one.
We wrote letters to all 21 manufacturers in question, and asked each of them to explain their position on the matter. A few responded quickly, some took up to several months to reply, while others still have not responded at all. Between August and December, 2006, we met with some of the OEMs and their associations. We also spoke with Industry Canada. All of these meetings were constructive and positive.
During the latter part of 2006, we had to update the status of a number of the OEM Web sites. I'm saying "update" rather than "change," because in some cases, it is now unclear whether these sites actually ever were closed to Canada as originally reported. Regardless, in all cases, the update is that the sites are open to Canada, which we will take as a positive development.
As I reported previously, our first meeting was with Volvo, and their Web site's status was the first to be updated from "closed" to "open." General Motors' site was definitely closed for several months but was reopened by September. Apparently, it had something to do with the GST, but the problem was resolved and GM has pledged that their site will remain open to Canadians.
During a random check one day in October, I discovered that Canadian subscriptions were being accepted by Jaguar, Land Rover, Nissan and Infinity. In December, we received a reply from Suzuki Canada in which they told us that their US technical web site is available to Canadians, and I was able to confirm this. I then found that not only is Kia's site open to Canada, but they don't even charge for the information! Again, these had all previously been reported as closed.
In the case of Honda and Acura, I found I was able to link from their Web sites to that of Helm Inc., the "official" Honda and Acura International service information outlet. Canadian subscriptions are accepted there, but without actually giving them my credit card info I could not determine the depth of coverage. It looks to be comparable to the US sites. I also noticed that the Mazda site has a button for "International Orders," but when you move the cursor over it, you get a pop up saying "Coming Soon."
If we remove all of these from the list, we're left with only ten OEMs that remain closed to Canada. Of those ten, the BMW/Mini group appears to be trying to make moves in our direction, and Toyota agreed to look into the situation (which will also affect Lexus). Ford, Subaru, Porsche and Mitsubishi have not responded, and neither has the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association.
Did NATA's VISTA campaign influence the apparent change of heart by some of the OEMs? At least one manufacturer insider told us that their legal department advised against a public statement. So while they may be acting for the reasons we advised, they seem to prefer acting with little or no fanfare or acknowledgement of our involvement. That's fine. We're not in this for any recognition. The end result is all that matters. Still, it would be better to have a formal agreement instead of it all being a bit of a mystery.
Anyway, that's the good news. But there is a bit of a dark cloud developing over this issue. There are certain parties within our industry whose actions have the potential to divide us over this issue. "Together we stand, divided we fall," so we can't let that happen.
NATA Canada's approach to the information access problem is to continue to pursue a voluntary agreement with the OEMs. The approach that others are taking is to seek government intervention. NATA has never said that it opposes a legislated solution. We simply don't hold much hope that the government will act on it within the short timeframe we have before we won't be able to work on vehicles due to lack of information.
Just because we don't believe a legislative solution is the best way to approach the issue doesn't mean we're about to put obstacles in the way. We're not telling our members to withdraw their support from other associations they may belong to if they don't back our approach. The industry must stick together if we hope to resolve this issue.
NATA does not want to send any mixed signals. We have been very clear from the get-go how we propose to work on the issue, and we have not altered our course one bit. We most certainly don't want to end up with a situation like there is in some parts of the US. I'm referring to the battle being waged between parties still backing Right to Repair legislation and the ASA. Yes, there are groups still pushing R2R bills in the US in spite of the existence of the aforementioned OEM technical information Web sites.
The way I see it, there can only be one motivating factor behind the push for R2R legislation in the US: a deeply rooted mistrust between the OEMs and the aftermarket. R2R backers do not trust that the OEMs will maintain their technical Web sites indefinitely unless the law makes it mandatory that they do so. The OEMs don't trust the R2R backers because they believe such legislation could force them to also hand over their proprietary engineering data and software to aftermarket parts and equipment manufacturers.
Recently, Oklahoma introduced its own version of the Motor Vehicles Owners' Right to Repair Act. The bill proposes that a state government agency and the Oklahoma court system assist repairers in acquiring automotive service information. The ASA opposes the bill because it would put the ASA-Automaker Agreement at risk, and because independent repairers already have access to service information via automaker Web sites, making such legislation unnecessary. As it has done at the national level, and in all states where similar bills have been introduced, the ASA is urging Oklahoma shop owners to contact their state House of Representatives members and ask that they oppose House Bill 1584.
"Right to Repair legislation has failed on the federal level in the last several congresses. Proponents of Right to Repair legislation have now moved to the state level. We hope Oklahoma legislators will also say no to Right to Repair legislation and more government intervention," said Bob Redding, ASA's Washington, D.C. representative.
Of course, this has caused an uproar. David Parde, president of the Coalition for Auto Repair Equality (CARE) fired back, "In its zeal to kill a pro-motoring consumer/pro-small business bill in Oklahoma, and to seal its relationship with the car companies, the Automotive Service Association (ASA) has misrepresented the recently introduced Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act to its Oklahoma membership, wrongly stating that the Right to Repair Act will depend on a state government agency and the Oklahoma court system to assist repairers in acquiring automotive service information.
"The legislation only mandates court action by consumers or repair facilities if the car companies do not release the entire necessary repair information to the vehicle owners and repair shops," Parde continued.
So what is the argument? The bill would provide a process by which vehicle owners and/or repair shops can bring car companies to court if they don't provide service information. Where is the contradiction in the ASA statement? Besides, the information is already available, so why is this necessary? Sounds to me like a dog chasing its tail.
Then the name-calling began…
"Falling back on its association with the car companies' clearinghouse called the National Automotive Service Task Force (NASTF), ASA states in its release that they are working through the voluntary National Automotive Service Task Force to assure repairers timely service information via the automaker Web sites," said Parde. "NASTF is Car Company founded, funded and monitored. It's the classic fox watching over the chicken coup," he continued.
NASTF is a "Car Company clearinghouse," Car Company founded, funded and monitored? I don't think so. NASTF is a non-profit organization made up of representatives from the aftermarket auto industry, the US Environmental Protection Agency, automotive associations including the ASA, and automobile manufacturers.
The bottom line is, in the US they have NASTF and the Web sites it oversees. I believe it is likely that many of the R2R supporters in the US are unaware of the OEM Web sites, or haven't tried using them. But here in Canada we have no voluntary agreement or legislation governing our access to OEM service and repair information, so we're at the mercy of the OEMs, and a number of them clearly don't want us to have access at all.
Rather than approaching them in a confrontational or threatening way, we have chosen to demonstrate to them why it is in their best interest to share the repair information with the aftermarket industry. We have developed a pretty strong case. Where we have been afforded an opportunity to present it, we have been successful in identifying some facts that they hadn't considered. At this point, if the government is to get involved, all we're asking them to do is help us get the manufacturers to the table. I'm sure the government would much rather see the industry resolve its issues by itself rather than drafting complex legislation that may never see the light of day.
To you, the grass roots repairer, I say: stay informed and support this cause as you see fit. Just know that we all have the same goal and we must support each other as we take this journey together.
Editor's Note: Our sincere appreciation to Kara Cunningham and Collision Quarterly Magazine for granting us permission to reproduce the foregoing article by Rene Young.
(SEE HEADLINES) |
|
|
