The following opinion is presented on-line for informational use only and does not replace the official version. (Mich Dept of Attorney General Web Site - www.ag.state.mi.us)


STATE OF MICHIGAN

JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM, ATTORNEY GENERAL

LICENSING AND REGULATION:

MECHANICS:

MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICE AND REPAIR ACT:

Application of Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act to business of installing motor vehicle replacement windshield glass

A business engaged in installing motor vehicle replacement windshield glass is not required to register and comply with the Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act so long as it does not (i) diagnose the operation of a motor vehicle, (ii) remove motor vehicle parts to be remachined, (iii) install finished machined or remachined motor vehicle parts, or (iv) replace motor vehicle supporting structures which serve as the frame on those vehicles having a unitized body.


Opinion No. 7011

March 23, 1999


Honorable Christopher D. Dingell
State Senator
The Capitol
Lansing, MI 48913


You have asked whether a business engaged in installing motor vehicle replacement windshield glass must register and comply with the Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act.

The Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act (Act), 1974 PA 300, MCL 257.1301 et seq; MSA 9.1720(1) et seq, regulates the repairing of motor vehicles. The Act's title states that it is:

AN ACT to regulate the practice of servicing and repairing motor vehicles; to proscribe unfair and deceptive practices; to provide for training and certification of mechanics; to provide for the registration of motor vehicle repair facilities; to provide for enforcement; and to prescribe penalties.

In order to fall within the Act's regulatory scheme, the installation of motor vehicle replacement windshield glass must constitute an activity covered by the Act. Section 2(g) of the Act defines "motor vehicle repair facility" as follows:

"Motor vehicle repair facility" means a place of business which engages in the business of performing or employing persons who perform maintenance, diagnosis, vehicle body work, or repair service on a motor vehicle for compensation, but excluding all of the following:

(i) A person who engages only in the business of repairing the motor vehicles of a single commercial or industrial establishment or governmental agency.

(ii) A person repairing his or her own or a family member's car.

(iii) A business that does not diagnose the operation of a motor vehicle, does not remove parts from a motor vehicle to be remachined, and does not install finished machined or remachined parts on a motor vehicle, not including a motor vehicle repair facility that engages in the business of performing or employing persons who perform vehicle body work.

(Emphasis added.)

OAG, 1977-1978, No 5418, p 757 (December 29, 1978), concluded that a business that installs and balances tires exclusively is not subject to the Act. That opinion reasoned that although the installation of tires constitutes motor vehicle maintenance or repair service, such activity does not involve diagnosing the operation of a motor vehicle, removal of vehicle parts for remachining, or installation on vehicles of finished machined or remachined parts. Thus, such activity was found to be exempt from the Act's definition of motor vehicle repair facility.

While the installation of motor vehicle replacement windshield glass constitutes motor vehicle "maintenance" or "repair service," the facility is nevertheless excluded from the Act pursuant to section 2(g)(iii) if it does not engage in diagnosing the operation of a motor vehicle, removing vehicle parts to be remachined, or installing finished machined or remachined parts on vehicles. Thus, the installation of motor vehicle replacement windshield glass does not fall within the Act's definition of motor vehicle repair facility, so long as such activity does not come within the Act's definition of vehicle body work.

Section 2a(f) of the Act defines "vehicle body work" as follows:

"Vehicle body work" means the business or activity of repairing physical damage to a motor vehicle by repairing, mending, straightening, or replacing a major component part, except for the engine or transmission.

(Emphasis added.)

Section 2a(d) of the Act defines the term "major component part" to mean any one of the following parts of a motor vehicle:

(i) The engine.
(ii) The transmission.
(iii) The right or left front fender.
(iv) The hood.
(v) A door allowing entrance to or egress from the passenger
compartment of the vehicle.
(vi) The front or rear bumper.
(vii) The right or left rear quarter panel.
(viii) The deck lid, tailgate, or hatchback.
(ix) The trunk floor pan.
(x) The cargo box of a pickup.
(xi) The frame, or if the vehicle has a unitized body, the supporting
structure or structures that serve as the frame.
(xii) The body of a passenger vehicle.

Motor vehicle windshield glass is not specifically referenced in the Act's enumeration of parts that comprise a "major component part" of a motor vehicle. Under the doctrine of expressio unium est exclusio alterius, express mention in a statute of one thing implies the exclusion of other similar things. People v Lange, 105 Mich App 263, 266; 306 NW2d 514 (1981). Where certain things are specified in a statute, the intention to exclude all other things from its operation may be inferred. Eyde v Lansing Twp, 109 Mich App 641, 645; 311 NW2d 438 (1981), aff'd 420 Mich 287; 363 NW2d 277 (1984). Applying these principles of statutory construction, it must be concluded that the absence of any reference in the Act to "windshield" or "glass" in the Act's definition of "major component part" evidences the Legislature's intent to exclude these items from those parts which comprise a vehicle's "major component part." Where a statute expressly provides the definition of the terms used therein, such definitions are binding and the court cannot look elsewhere for their meaning. Bennett v Pitts, 31 Mich App 530, 533-534; 188 NW2d 81 (1971).

While it might be argued that windshield glass constitutes a "supporting structure or structures that serve as the frame" on vehicles having a unitized body (see, section 2a(d)(xi)), this poses a question of fact, not of law. The role of the Attorney General is to issue opinions on questions of law, not fact. MCL 14.32; MSA 3.185; Michigan Beer & Wine Wholesalers Ass'n v Attorney General, 142 Mich App 294, 300-302; 370 NW2d 328 (1985), cert den 479 US 939; 107 S Ct 420; 93 L Ed 2d 371 (1986).

It is my opinion, therefore, that a business engaged in installing motor vehicle replacement windshield glass is not required to register and comply with the Motor Vehicle Service and Repair Act so long as it does not (i) diagnose the operation of a motor vehicle, (ii) remove motor vehicle parts to be remachined, (iii) install finished machined or remachined motor vehicle parts, or (iv) replace motor vehicle supporting structures which serve as the frame on those vehicles having a unitized body.


JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM
Attorney General