Windscreen Claims WILL Affect Your NCD
Discussion
LoonR1 said:
Glassman said:
If it bothers you that much, feel free to ignore it.
Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
But there's no story. I've shown dozens of times on here that there's no story. I've posted policy booklets from the insurers websites showing that there's no story. I've asked you to provide evidence which you haven't, other than irrelevant and tangential forums. Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
LoonR1 said:
There is no story. There is no issue. You just keep whipping it up to pretend there is in the vain hope that it'll drum up some business for you.
I get countless emails and have many conversations with people who say they have seen increases following a glass claim. I have also spoken to many people who have also had their NCD affected in some way because some insurers/policies do/did impact on it. Yes, it's my business and that is why I get so much involvement in the subject. LoonR1 said:
Admit it. Your sole purpose on this thread is to try to con people into believing that their NCD will be reduced so they'll come and pay full retail price with you rather than just a £50-£100 excess via their insurer.
Con? Interesting choice of word. And oh yeah, it's all so they take up my retail offer, and click on the flashing advert I have running in conjunction with this thread. Get real.
Ignore the thread; unsubscribe. You're clearly getting far too worked up over it.
You forgot the bit about a glass claim is also a "perceived risk".
When this thread was started in 2010, there were some changes to some policies which meant that making a glass claim would affect NCD. You cannot deny this. Since then, there have been more changes and most policies have reverted those affects (although one or two haven't).
At the time of starting the thread, the title was correct. Since then, some people have stated they have seen a rise in their premium and have attributed to a previous glass claim.
As for the commercial interest, a lot of my customers are still using their insurance cover to pay for glass and windscreen damage (which I also help them with). It's their choice. Some choose not to, but in the main, most still are. My interest remains as using the thread as a sounding board to see what experience people have had or are having with their insurance NCD - or premium - subsequent to making a glass claim.
Your input is interesting and a valuable insight. Please stop trying to turn this thread into an argument. There is a public interest and there have been countless - as in, I have lost count - people who have referenced this thread and suggested their premium was affected (in some cases NCD) after a glass claim.
Commercial interest.
When this thread was started in 2010, there were some changes to some policies which meant that making a glass claim would affect NCD. You cannot deny this. Since then, there have been more changes and most policies have reverted those affects (although one or two haven't).
At the time of starting the thread, the title was correct. Since then, some people have stated they have seen a rise in their premium and have attributed to a previous glass claim.
As for the commercial interest, a lot of my customers are still using their insurance cover to pay for glass and windscreen damage (which I also help them with). It's their choice. Some choose not to, but in the main, most still are. My interest remains as using the thread as a sounding board to see what experience people have had or are having with their insurance NCD - or premium - subsequent to making a glass claim.
Your input is interesting and a valuable insight. Please stop trying to turn this thread into an argument. There is a public interest and there have been countless - as in, I have lost count - people who have referenced this thread and suggested their premium was affected (in some cases NCD) after a glass claim.
Commercial interest.
The inference is that insurers share information, and if they (or some) are asking for disclosure of previous glass claims, it kind of ties them all with this one rope. I think it's interesting to see how different insurers handle this part of their indemnity, especially in an ever-evolving/competitive/regulated/etc market.
Change is never too far away.
With the cost of an average windscreen being the highest it has ever been (and looks like it will continue to rise) do you see 'inclusive' glass and windscreen cover being around long term?
Change is never too far away.
With the cost of an average windscreen being the highest it has ever been (and looks like it will continue to rise) do you see 'inclusive' glass and windscreen cover being around long term?
Edited by Glassman on Wednesday 8th April 20:19
projectgt said:
Autoglass got the seal for my car wrong 3 times, despite me sending the part diagram and number for the correct seal and them promising me they had ordered it and would fit it...no each time the job was 'done sir' with a generic seal that caused wind noise above 40 mph.
They broke three screens each time they removed them.
Admiral have put autoglass's incompetence down as three claims on my policy...a Twitter rant on my part ensued to no avail.
I did finally get te correct seal fitted at the cost of my no claims and rise in insurance policy.
Wow - what car was this on?They broke three screens each time they removed them.
Admiral have put autoglass's incompetence down as three claims on my policy...a Twitter rant on my part ensued to no avail.
I did finally get te correct seal fitted at the cost of my no claims and rise in insurance policy.
Are you saying your NCD was affected, as well as the premium? With Admiral?
LoonR1 said:
Insurers share very little information.
All insurers have always asked for glass claims to be declared.
Glass claims costs are peanuts to insurers. The market in general increased the excess from the £50 it's been for deades to around £70-£100 a few years back. They're unlikely to do it again.
Whilst glass costs matter to you insurers have huge volume discounts to play with and as such can really push for massively favourable pricing. Even if a glass provider only makes 10p per fit, they have such huge volume that it could make it viable. I don't know how much they make btw, but I do know that the volumes provided by insurers means 1 or 2 national fitters can negotiate huge volume price discounts.
We pay £100millions a year in Injury claims or Credit Hire. A few million on glass is almost irrelevant as long as we know we've got a decent enough deal.
I once asked a broker (Autonet IIRC) to remove the glass cover off the quote. Computer said no. All insurers have always asked for glass claims to be declared.
Glass claims costs are peanuts to insurers. The market in general increased the excess from the £50 it's been for deades to around £70-£100 a few years back. They're unlikely to do it again.
Whilst glass costs matter to you insurers have huge volume discounts to play with and as such can really push for massively favourable pricing. Even if a glass provider only makes 10p per fit, they have such huge volume that it could make it viable. I don't know how much they make btw, but I do know that the volumes provided by insurers means 1 or 2 national fitters can negotiate huge volume price discounts.
We pay £100millions a year in Injury claims or Credit Hire. A few million on glass is almost irrelevant as long as we know we've got a decent enough deal.
Would you say whatever the amount (which forms part of a FC premium) is viable business? I can't see it. Even with an extremely low Average Invoice Value (which I know the likes of Admiral and Hastings are on) I still can't see why insurers would keep windscreen cover as an inclusive feature. Some insurers, having said that, have dropped glass cover from comprehensive policies.
LoonR1 said:
What makes you think it isn't? It seems to me that everyone wants everything to be made clear. It is made clear in the policy booklet, but nobody bothers to read it, then pretends it's "small print". I found the policy booklet online in no time. It's there to read and digest before buying for each and every insurer. It's also sent to every new buyer and you have up to 14 days to cancel the policy if you don't like it, after you've bought.
Thing is that most people buy on price, then expect a mega service when they need to claim. Guess what? It doesn't always work that way. You're not necessarily buying rubbish, but much like the supermarket set up, buying form Lidl is unlikely to deliver the same quality of product that you'd find in Fortnum &Mason.
Agree with that. A very common question comes when some people find they're snookered behind the insurer-nominated supplier relationship. Ultimately, it is a price driven market and as much as a lot of people are to blame for not reading the terms, or not asking the right questions, I do feel that many insurers aren't doing enough. To you and I it may seem obvious what the Key Facts mean, or that some of it might need clarifying, but to many it is vague and, well, easy: "windscreen cover is unlimited" or 'simply call the glass claims number below' etc. Thing is that most people buy on price, then expect a mega service when they need to claim. Guess what? It doesn't always work that way. You're not necessarily buying rubbish, but much like the supermarket set up, buying form Lidl is unlikely to deliver the same quality of product that you'd find in Fortnum &Mason.
One of my own experiences with a broker: I asked what 'unlimited windscreen cover' meant, exactly and he jittered and stuttered some mumbo jumbo about taking the vehicle "anywhere" and it "will be covered". There were no other words to indicate capping, limits, restrictions or nominated suppliers. It was only after I persisted (and asked them to include in the policy what had just been said, in writing) that I got the floor manager who then explained that as long as the work was carried out by the prevailing nominated repairer, there would be no limit on the claim (otherwise, the payout would be limited to £100.00).
I asked for the glass cover element to be removed and they said they couldn't. So I jogged on.
Just had a very interesting conversation with a customer who, despite having full windscreen cover for her (brand new Audi Q5) has decided to pay for a (genuine OEM) replacement windscreen.
She initially called Admiral insurance (on the glassline number) and was diverted to the preferred supplier (you know the one; three syllables. Third syllable: rhymes with grass). She said they informed her that they are required to notify her that her premium might be affected if she made a claim.
(There was also some dialogue about the authenticity of the glass and when she was told that the windscreen will be 'an equivalent' but not original, OEM Audi branded glass). Ergo: she though best to pay for it and keep her premium down.
I'll get more info from her when the job is done.
She initially called Admiral insurance (on the glassline number) and was diverted to the preferred supplier (you know the one; three syllables. Third syllable: rhymes with grass). She said they informed her that they are required to notify her that her premium might be affected if she made a claim.
(There was also some dialogue about the authenticity of the glass and when she was told that the windscreen will be 'an equivalent' but not original, OEM Audi branded glass). Ergo: she though best to pay for it and keep her premium down.
I'll get more info from her when the job is done.
LoonR1 said:
Finally, your thread is about NCD and the Admiral policy booklet explicitly states that it doesn't affect your NCD.
At the time of starting the thread it was accurate. Rather than start multiple threads on the subject, I chose to update this one with some more current information based on what other people had experienced (and it is evidently a subject of considerable interest). Mods: please change the title to 'Windscreen Claims Might Affect NCD and/or May Influence Your Insurance Premium'. Ta.
LoonR1 said:
How is it "evidently a subject of considerable interest"? The only people who are postings n this is you and me.
Because it's referred to quite a lot by people who have seen the thread but choose not to comment on it. This thread is also linked to other forums where the conversation flows for the interest and benefit of others. LoonR1 said:
...because it's your business and you dislike the big glass companies and their very small margin stranglehold on the huge insurance market.
Wrong. LoonR1 said:
4. You want a slice of the pie, but at higher profit margins
I'm trying to establish some clarity as a consumer, and as someone who is in a position where the question gets asked a lot (or that the subject is discussed a lot). My commercial interests lie far from these insurer-nominated/preferred supplier deals, so in this context, the inference is irrelevant. 
LoonR1 said:
sjj84 said:
I had a windscreen replaced last year, by auto glass, paid for by admiral (minus excess obviously). Didn't affect my renewal premium, or excess nor did they try and charge me a mid term fee. Surprisingly easy and hassle free and the bloke did a good job, which I was worried about after reading this and various other threads beforehand.
GLASSMANyou pointedly ignore this comment and "note" the one that supports your point.
To be honest I'm tiring of arguing with your biased take on this and your blatantly obvious commercial argument to support your personal business. As I don't own an insurer then I have no such axe to grind.
Is that OK for you?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff