Advice on car windscreen issue with main dealer needed

[sasha320]

I have actually, but on both occasions I didn’t get definitive responses.

Words to the effect of, in principle you’d be OK but it is not until you made a claim would we assess and if a claim was a consequence of a sub-standard part then we may not pay. Should that be the case then you’d need to turn to the windscreen fitter / glass manufacturer - and we’re talking about a claim for a collision / accident - not a replacement screen.

None of this was particularly reassuring.

Interestingly the insurance company contradicted themselves as they couldn’t bring themselves to provide assurances on cover using a pattern part yet they would only pay for a pattern part!!!

So, weasel words really, but it is all ancient history now - I’m looking forward to buying a brand new OEM replacement screen and having nice branded glass all round.

Edited by sasha320 on Sunday 21st April 22:45

[Mexman]

WARNING TO ALL SALES PEOPLE.
DO NOT SELL THIS PERSON A USED CAR!
IF HE DRIVES ONTO YOUR PITCH, TURN THE LIGHTS OFF AND GO AND HIDE IN THE BOGS!
THE MANAGEMENT.

[sasha320]

Bet they won’t...

[Glassman]

sasha320 said:

Update:

Replacement OEM screen cost at £1,100

Says who, same dealer?

Of so, I bet it's not.

[Pothole]

I worked for Autoglass (in their scheduling team) for a while and it appeared that some insurers covered OEM glass. You should investigate those.

[sasha320]

Glassman said:

sasha320 said:

Update:

Replacement OEM screen cost at £1,100

Says who, same dealer?

Of so, I bet it's not.

The breakdown is £800 for the glass and fitting; and £400 is for the camera calibration.

Do you think the cost should be significantly cheaper elsewhere? Because I’d be happy to get it done elsewhere.

[sasha320]

Pothole said:

I worked for Autoglass (in their scheduling team) for a while and it appeared that some insurers covered OEM glass. You should investigate those.

Thanks, no joy on this one I’m afraid, my insurer says ‘their glass’ or a £100 contribution towards my choice of glass.

There’s also the small matter of whether my insurer would accept a claim or whether they would have directed my claim towards the original windscreen repairer.

Anyway, the car is getting booked in this week for new windscreen, four tyres and an Inspection Service.

Funnily enough the prospect of a few thousand pounds worth of high margin service work will flush out the service people from the bog (no pun).

[anonymous-user]

Probably been done to death earlier, but i’d be surprised if windscreen would cover a pre-existing condition as it were.
The dealer should have put right the botched repair they oversaw.

[Rewe]

Much too late to be of any use to you now but............. a few years ago a had Autoglass (I think) out to repair a chip. The tech said that it marginal if he could fix it but was willing to have a go.

When the repair failed about 3 months later I got them out to fit a new screen, expecting to pay £70 insurance excess. In fact, without prompting Autoglass replaced the screen at their expense with no insurance claim. Surprisingly good service I thought.

[Glassman]

sasha320 said:

/... my insurer says ‘their glass’ or a £100 contribution towards my choice of glass.

This is something which should have been brought to your attention before policy inception. It's there for you to see (because it is a requirement) only it's not that easy to find nor understand.

sasha320 said:

There’s also the small matter of whether my insurer would accept a claim or whether they would have directed my claim towards the original windscreen repairer.

A guarantee usually won't (usually) transfer with the sale (of the car).

Re; what you have been quoted, I can't comment without knowing the car details. Don't get me started on cameras and calibration.

[Buster73]

xjay1337 said:

Just get a "pattern" windscreen they are all built to a high standard.
You sound like a very difficult customer!

A “ pattern “ windscreen , can the average man in the street tell the difference?

“ implications “ for his warranty , I’m struggling to understand what these implications could possibly be.

This bloke has issues , he needs to take a good look at himself .

[Glassman]

Buster73 said:

A “ pattern “ windscreen , can the average man in the street tell the difference?

He'd have to pick up some pace to keep up with the car first.

[sasha320]

Glassman said:

sasha320 said:

/... my insurer says ‘their glass’ or a £100 contribution towards my choice of glass.

This is something which should have been brought to your attention before policy inception. It's there for you to see (because it is a requirement) only it's not that easy to find nor understand.

>> I’m fine with this and knew about it at policy inception. I took (and continue to take) the view that if I crack the windscreen from an unlucky stone or anything else that is unequivocally on my watch then the full cost of a replacement is on the cards.

[sasha320]

Glassman said:

A guarantee usually won't (usually) transfer with the sale (of the car).

Re; what you have been quoted, I can't comment without knowing the car details. Don't get me started on cameras and calibration.

What are your views on cameras and calibration?

Audi A6 btw

[Glassman]

sasha320 said:

What are your views on cameras and calibration?

Audi A6 btw

First and foremost, I think 1100-quid for an A6 windscreen is strong, and probably an expected price from a main agent. There'll be quite a margin on the parts (some may not even be necessary) and the labour element may be book time but the actual fitting will probably/is usually carried out by a subcontractor.

http://www.glasstecpaul.com/adas-recalibration-aft...

[sasha320]

Buster73 said:

“ implications “ for his warranty , I’m struggling to understand what these implications could possibly be.

The implication is simple to understand; for the car to be warranted and insured, the assumption made by the insurers is that all the parts used on the car are all to the standard / design / tolerance / fitment of the original equipment as designed by the manufacturer.

A ‘pattern’ part may or may not meet the manufacturer’s specification. The feedback from the insurers was that if the unthinkable was to happen then they’d want to understand post any incident / failure whether the part (in this case the windscreen) met the manufacturer’s standard and if not whether it contributed to any incident / failure.

The only way they could provide some ‘advance’ assurance was if OEM parts were used.

The sort of scenario we could be talking about is where the refraction properties of the glass means the lane keeping assist cameras work to a different set of parameters which may or may not equate to the edge of the road causing an accident.

That said, I control the vehicle so I’m less fussed about this; I’m more concerned about a future warranty claim being invalidated.

[sasha320]

Glassman said:

First and foremost, I think 1100-quid for an A6 windscreen is strong, and probably an expected price from a main agent. There'll be quite a margin on the parts (some may not even be necessary) and the labour element may be book time but the actual fitting will probably/is usually carried out by a subcontractor.

http://www.glasstecpaul.com/adas-recalibration-aft...

I agree with the opinion expressed in the article, however I need my insurers to agree with the opinion as well!

I’d love to know what the calibration process actually involves.

[xjay1337]

sasha320 said:

The implication is simple to understand; for the car to be warranted and insured, the assumption made by the insurers is that all the parts used on the car are all to the standard / design / tolerance / fitment of the original equipment as designed by the manufacturer.

A ‘pattern’ part may or may not meet the manufacturer’s specification. The feedback from the insurers was that if the unthinkable was to happen then they’d want to understand post any incident / failure whether the part (in this case the windscreen) met the manufacturer’s standard and if not whether it contributed to any incident / failure.

The only way they could provide some ‘advance’ assurance was if OEM parts were used.

The sort of scenario we could be talking about is where the refraction properties of the glass means the lane keeping assist cameras work to a different set of parameters which may or may not equate to the edge of the road causing an accident.

That said, I control the vehicle so I’m less fussed about this; I’m more concerned about a future warranty claim being invalidated.

As I said.
Very difficult customer. Bordering on ignorance.

[Sheepshanks]

sasha320 said:

I have actually, but on both occasions I didn’t get definitive responses.

Words to the effect of, in principle you’d be OK but it is not until you made a claim would we assess and if a claim was a consequence of a sub-standard part then we may not pay. Should that be the case then you’d need to turn to the windscreen fitter / glass manufacturer - and we’re talking about a claim for a collision / accident - not a replacement screen.

None of this was particularly reassuring.

Interestingly the insurance company contradicted themselves as they couldn’t bring themselves to provide assurances on cover using a pattern part yet they would only pay for a pattern part!!!

It's completly absurd to think that you could possibly have an issue making a claim on your insurance because of a windscreen your insurance company ordered to be fitted.

sasha320 said:

So, weasel words really, but it is all ancient history now - I’m looking forward to buying a brand new OEM replacement screen and having nice branded glass all round.

Daughter's SEAT Ibiza needed a new screen and I was concerned as the glass on her car has a very distinctive tint. I'd also read the horror stories about optical defects and even that pattern screens are thinner (so let more noise in).

I don't know if this is true, but the company doing the fitting said it would be exactly the same screen as the SEAT OEM one, execept that it would have the glass makers name on rather than SEAT's. I was dubious but I have to say the glass was spot on in all the areas I was concerened about. I think one of the bigger pattern glass makers went out of business some time ago.

[Glassman]

Sheepshanks said:

I don't know if this is true, but the company doing the fitting said it would be exactly the same screen as the SEAT OEM one, execept that it would have the glass makers name on rather than SEAT's.

With rare exception, if it does not bear the car manufacturer's logo it's not exactly the same product. Even when the (glass) manufactuer is the same (with and without the car logo) it doesn't necessarily mean it is the same product or produced in exactly the same way. As one glass manufacturer puts it (the aftermarket windscreen they produce) responds to the same main technical and aesthetic characteristics as the original. So basically, this 'copy' looks the same and does the same job as the one it was copied from.