Lease co / windscreen issue - scam?
Discussion
I'm in the process of arranging return for one of our company fleet vehicles, and I've tripped up across something frustrating which, digging into it, has a rather nasty whiff about it...
- Lease car has 3 very small chips on the windscreen.
- BVRLA guide does not have any minimum size for windscreen chips, so need to get them repaired!
- Call insurers preferred Automotive Glass supplier...get told they will not attend for chips <2mm. Get 2 different reasons: 1) The website reason - windscreen is perfectly safe, no need to repair; 2) The party line "we cannot repair as the windscreen is more likely to crack when making a small repair as we need to apply pressure" :cough: WHAT?!?
- Call lease company. They take >24 hours to come back with the party line.
- Call the auto-glass supplier again. Get party line from them. Get told they are the preferred windscreen partner for lease co, and that lease co will ask them to replace the windscreen when it's returned.
At this point I get a little upset and get into an argument...the glazier's policy is such that they are forcing lease-car customers to return cars with windscreen chips which will then get referred to them to REPLACE the windscreen.
So...is this a scam, or is this just the unfortunate confluence of different companies' policies? And how do I get around it?!?
- Lease car has 3 very small chips on the windscreen.
- BVRLA guide does not have any minimum size for windscreen chips, so need to get them repaired!
- Call insurers preferred Automotive Glass supplier...get told they will not attend for chips <2mm. Get 2 different reasons: 1) The website reason - windscreen is perfectly safe, no need to repair; 2) The party line "we cannot repair as the windscreen is more likely to crack when making a small repair as we need to apply pressure" :cough: WHAT?!?
- Call lease company. They take >24 hours to come back with the party line.
- Call the auto-glass supplier again. Get party line from them. Get told they are the preferred windscreen partner for lease co, and that lease co will ask them to replace the windscreen when it's returned.
At this point I get a little upset and get into an argument...the glazier's policy is such that they are forcing lease-car customers to return cars with windscreen chips which will then get referred to them to REPLACE the windscreen.
So...is this a scam, or is this just the unfortunate confluence of different companies' policies? And how do I get around it?!?
I wouldn't bother with a repair as lease company will probably still want a new screen. It doesn't say repaired chips accepted in BVLRA from memory.
Just call all the windscreen people and get a quote for new, failing that drive the car and crack "cough" the screen if your excess is less through insurers but I know our fleet one is £250 when my personal one is z£75 or £100
Just call all the windscreen people and get a quote for new, failing that drive the car and crack "cough" the screen if your excess is less through insurers but I know our fleet one is £250 when my personal one is z£75 or £100
Had exactly the same, windscreen chips must be repaired on lease cars but unlike a few years back it seems insurance now won't repair the chip unless it's serious enough spread, crack, etc.
I DIY'd mine with what looks like the same kit the last poster linked to.
It's a piece of piss to do, just takes a bit of patience and care. If the screen shatters or cracks while doing it then it was obviously hit by a stone...........
I DIY'd mine with what looks like the same kit the last poster linked to.
It's a piece of piss to do, just takes a bit of patience and care. If the screen shatters or cracks while doing it then it was obviously hit by a stone...........
havoc said:
Potentially positive result - called our insurers, logged it as a "for info" claim at the moment, will wait and see what lease co'y say. If they want to charge for new w'screen, I'll activate the claim and just pay the insurance excess...
This is why we buy our cars, non of this crap.havoc said:
I'm in the process of arranging return for one of our company fleet vehicles, and I've tripped up across something frustrating which, digging into it, has a rather nasty whiff about it...
- Lease car has 3 very small chips on the windscreen.
- BVRLA guide does not have any minimum size for windscreen chips, so need to get them repaired!
- Call insurers preferred Automotive Glass supplier...get told they will not attend for chips <2mm. Get 2 different reasons: 1) The website reason - windscreen is perfectly safe, no need to repair; 2) The party line "we cannot repair as the windscreen is more likely to crack when making a small repair as we need to apply pressure" :cough: WHAT?!?
- Call lease company. They take >24 hours to come back with the party line.
- Call the auto-glass supplier again. Get party line from them. Get told they are the preferred windscreen partner for lease co, and that lease co will ask them to replace the windscreen when it's returned.
At this point I get a little upset and get into an argument...the glazier's policy is such that they are forcing lease-car customers to return cars with windscreen chips which will then get referred to them to REPLACE the windscreen.
So...is this a scam, or is this just the unfortunate confluence of different companies' policies? And how do I get around it?!?
]- Lease car has 3 very small chips on the windscreen.
- BVRLA guide does not have any minimum size for windscreen chips, so need to get them repaired!
- Call insurers preferred Automotive Glass supplier...get told they will not attend for chips <2mm. Get 2 different reasons: 1) The website reason - windscreen is perfectly safe, no need to repair; 2) The party line "we cannot repair as the windscreen is more likely to crack when making a small repair as we need to apply pressure" :cough: WHAT?!?
- Call lease company. They take >24 hours to come back with the party line.
- Call the auto-glass supplier again. Get party line from them. Get told they are the preferred windscreen partner for lease co, and that lease co will ask them to replace the windscreen when it's returned.
At this point I get a little upset and get into an argument...the glazier's policy is such that they are forcing lease-car customers to return cars with windscreen chips which will then get referred to them to REPLACE the windscreen.
So...is this a scam, or is this just the unfortunate confluence of different companies' policies? And how do I get around it?!?
Generally speaking, most repairers don't know what a good repair looks like, never mind how to achieve one.
There are an alarming number of windscreens which have been condemned when they could have been repaired (by a competent/experienced repairer). This low standard of repair is so rife, that so many consumers accept the poor standards, reinforcing the misconceptions... "but it's been filled" or "the hole has been sealed" or even, "there's a good chance the chip will crack".
One day I got tired of explaining it, so click on these and you'll get the general idea:
http://www.glasstecpaul.com/the-windscreen-chip-th...
http://www.glasstecpaul.com/to-see-or-not-to-see/
http://www.glasstecpaul.com/botched-windscreen-rep...
http://www.glasstecpaul.com/what-isnt-clear-about-...
If you genuinely believe that preferred repairers are ripping off customers Insurers) and their clients with poor repairs and unnecessary windscreen replacements you should get hold of the claims manager at the insurers concerned and explain the situation. Insurers are very cost driven and any suggestion that they are being played by a preferred supplier will get investigated.
At a former company we had a couple of prize incidents. A domestic glass window and door repairer was stating that doors were unrepairable after say a break in costing sometimes £1500. I admitted my connection but persuaded the claims inspector to allow my father who worked for a local respected upvc manufacturer and wholesaler to go have a look and he repaired it whilst he was there for around £100 saving £1500 claim. The preferred supplier got a lot less business from then on.
Working as a security surveyor we had a preferred supplier of safes. A domestic client had a break in and had his safe stolen. Local safe supplier went out and provided a new safe and put in writing that he would supply for the replacement safe an invoice for more than he had paid (so the he client could submit a fraudulent invoice and make some money out of the claim). The safe guy must have been monumentally stupid as the client was a vicar who'd had the vicarage safe stolen. The vicar promptly supplied a copy of the letter. We effectively sacked him as a supplier, and actively recommended other safe companies rather than him.
Moral - complain to insurer. If you have irrefutable evidence they should listen.
At a former company we had a couple of prize incidents. A domestic glass window and door repairer was stating that doors were unrepairable after say a break in costing sometimes £1500. I admitted my connection but persuaded the claims inspector to allow my father who worked for a local respected upvc manufacturer and wholesaler to go have a look and he repaired it whilst he was there for around £100 saving £1500 claim. The preferred supplier got a lot less business from then on.
Working as a security surveyor we had a preferred supplier of safes. A domestic client had a break in and had his safe stolen. Local safe supplier went out and provided a new safe and put in writing that he would supply for the replacement safe an invoice for more than he had paid (so the he client could submit a fraudulent invoice and make some money out of the claim). The safe guy must have been monumentally stupid as the client was a vicar who'd had the vicarage safe stolen. The vicar promptly supplied a copy of the letter. We effectively sacked him as a supplier, and actively recommended other safe companies rather than him.
Moral - complain to insurer. If you have irrefutable evidence they should listen.
Glassman said:
Generally speaking, most repairers don't know what a good repair looks like, never mind how to achieve one.
There are an alarming number of windscreens which have been condemned when they could have been repaired (by a competent/experienced repairer).
Quote snipped.There are an alarming number of windscreens which have been condemned when they could have been repaired (by a competent/experienced repairer).
To be honest there are a silly number of repairs and replacements done when there is no need. About 3 years ago I has literally half a brick fall off the back of the builders wagon I was following and hit the windscreen with enough of a bang to nearly make me brick myself... Very significant chip just outside the MOT area by a few mill. Was assured that the World would come to an end and i would be showered in glass at the smallest knock or light frost. Since then its been down to minus 15, up to 30+ and been hit by more stones than i can remember and the odd log. Still going strong...
elanfan said:
If you genuinely believe that preferred repairers are ripping off customers Insurers) and their clients with poor repairs and unnecessary windscreen replacements you should get hold of the claims manager at the insurers concerned and explain the situation. Insurers are very cost driven and any suggestion that they are being played by a preferred supplier will get investigated.
Wrong end of the stick - insurer not involved in this, it's the glass company vs the lease company:-- Glass co won't repair small chips
- Lease co (apparently) won't permit ANY chips.
- Lease co (allegedly) replaces any 'damaged' windscreens upon return from lessee, rather than repairing.
- Glazier contracted to do the replacement is the same one that won't repair small chips!!!
...so the glazier gets a big fee for a w'screen replacement rather than pennies for a chip repair! Seems rather cute...
Impasse said:
Ebay clicky. Other DIY solutions are available.
I used a kit like this and I was really impressed, you would never know there had been a chip in the screen.Most frustrating thing about owning a lease car can be returning it and being unsure what you need to sort/don't.
Anecdotally:
I returned my first lease car in March, it had a couple of small dings, scratches to a couple of alloys, and sods law a small chip to the windscreen a week before it was due to go back. Windscreen repair guy came out and said it was too small to repair so I asked it be replaced and paid the excess.
I got quotes for the body work and they came back between £600-£700. I decided to take my chances that the bill on inspection would be less, it was @£350 which included some excess mileage. A mate is fuming as he had a knock in a non-fault accident and had the repairs carried out at the expense of the other parties insurer, only to be charge £600 for a sub standard repair when he returned his lease car. Therefore if this happens to me I'll be insisting it goes to an approved repair centre.
I stuck some wear and tare money away every now and again and that meant I had the remainder to put towards the upfront payment on my current lease car.
Anecdotally:
I returned my first lease car in March, it had a couple of small dings, scratches to a couple of alloys, and sods law a small chip to the windscreen a week before it was due to go back. Windscreen repair guy came out and said it was too small to repair so I asked it be replaced and paid the excess.
I got quotes for the body work and they came back between £600-£700. I decided to take my chances that the bill on inspection would be less, it was @£350 which included some excess mileage. A mate is fuming as he had a knock in a non-fault accident and had the repairs carried out at the expense of the other parties insurer, only to be charge £600 for a sub standard repair when he returned his lease car. Therefore if this happens to me I'll be insisting it goes to an approved repair centre.
I stuck some wear and tare money away every now and again and that meant I had the remainder to put towards the upfront payment on my current lease car.
havoc said:
elanfan said:
If you genuinely believe that preferred repairers are ripping off customers Insurers) and their clients with poor repairs and unnecessary windscreen replacements you should get hold of the claims manager at the insurers concerned and explain the situation. Insurers are very cost driven and any suggestion that they are being played by a preferred supplier will get investigated.
Wrong end of the stick - insurer not involved in this, it's the glass company vs the lease company:-- Glass co won't repair small chips
- Lease co (apparently) won't permit ANY chips.
- Lease co (allegedly) replaces any 'damaged' windscreens upon return from lessee, rather than repairing.
- Glazier contracted to do the replacement is the same one that won't repair small chips!!!
...so the glazier gets a big fee for a w'screen replacement rather than pennies for a chip repair! Seems rather cute...
havoc said:
elanfan said:
If you genuinely believe that preferred repairers are ripping off customers Insurers) and their clients with poor repairs and unnecessary windscreen replacements you should get hold of the claims manager at the insurers concerned and explain the situation. Insurers are very cost driven and any suggestion that they are being played by a preferred supplier will get investigated.
Wrong end of the stick - insurer not involved in this, it's the glass company vs the lease company:-- Glass co won't repair small chips
- Lease co (apparently) won't permit ANY chips.
- Lease co (allegedly) replaces any 'damaged' windscreens upon return from lessee, rather than repairing.
- Glazier contracted to do the replacement is the same one that won't repair small chips!!!
...so the glazier gets a big fee for a w'screen replacement rather than pennies for a chip repair! Seems rather cute...
Otherwise it may be the insurers which dictate they will not pay the glass company for repairs less than 2mm and the glass company refuses as their is a risk they will not be paid from the insurer. Is this a possibility?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff