There is a continuing debate related to insurers’ use of direct repair programs, in which they contract with particular body shops to perform insured auto repairs according to terms agreed to by the insurers and repair shop owners. A similar debate exists related to insurers specifying the use of aftermarket crash parts instead of original equipment manufacturer parts to replace damaged vehicle components, such as door panels, fenders, and hoods. This study examines these issues from a variety of perspectives providing initial evidence that if properly used, these cost containment tools can be beneficial to consumers and insurers.