What do you Get for your Windscreen Excess?
Discussion
The drill for most comprehensive policies has always been straight froward: the policyholder makes a contribution towards replacement (excess) which is around the 60-quid mark these days (some more, a few less excluding commercial policies). If the windscreen is repaired, this is usually free (IIRC, Aviva however have slapped a £10.00 excess on this on some of their policies and Admiral have gone with a £25.00 policyholder contribution).
On Hastings Insurance the (£60.00) excess applies to both replacement and repair. And today I have learned that Amlin Insurance do the same (£60 for repair or replacement) but this is as long as their nominated repairer is used; 100 pounds if not.
If you're going to pay £60.00 (or 100) for a repair, you can - for the same contribution - have a new windscreen fitted. This raises an obvious question from a consumer point of view. Commercially, the industry is bereft of regulation and there is no process which ensures that repairable damage is repaired, yet it foolishly relies on people being generally honest as well as repairers are looking after their interests. But many screens are replaced when the damage could have been repaired. This practice exists because,
1) there are potentially higher margins in replacement;
2) the average repairer skill-set is not good enough;
3) the repairer's assessment of what can/cannot be repaired is inaccurate;
4) many repairs will take the easier option of replacing rather than risk a repair that looks the same afterwards;
5) as with point (1) the (employed) repairer might get a higher bonus for replacement;
6) in some cases, the policyholder will not accept a repair.
I'm curious/interested to see how different policies vary, or have changed; if anything, to raise the awareness for future reference. What does your policy state in terms of repair v replacement, and how much is your contribution (amount) in the event of such damage? Are you penalised for not using the insurer's nominated repairer? Do they apply any limits, and if so, when?
On Hastings Insurance the (£60.00) excess applies to both replacement and repair. And today I have learned that Amlin Insurance do the same (£60 for repair or replacement) but this is as long as their nominated repairer is used; 100 pounds if not.
If you're going to pay £60.00 (or 100) for a repair, you can - for the same contribution - have a new windscreen fitted. This raises an obvious question from a consumer point of view. Commercially, the industry is bereft of regulation and there is no process which ensures that repairable damage is repaired, yet it foolishly relies on people being generally honest as well as repairers are looking after their interests. But many screens are replaced when the damage could have been repaired. This practice exists because,
1) there are potentially higher margins in replacement;
2) the average repairer skill-set is not good enough;
3) the repairer's assessment of what can/cannot be repaired is inaccurate;
4) many repairs will take the easier option of replacing rather than risk a repair that looks the same afterwards;
5) as with point (1) the (employed) repairer might get a higher bonus for replacement;
6) in some cases, the policyholder will not accept a repair.
I'm curious/interested to see how different policies vary, or have changed; if anything, to raise the awareness for future reference. What does your policy state in terms of repair v replacement, and how much is your contribution (amount) in the event of such damage? Are you penalised for not using the insurer's nominated repairer? Do they apply any limits, and if so, when?
Unhelpfully answering none of your questions here, but I do wonder if you have to pay the same regardless of repair or replacement, would the unscrupulous kind not make a small chip etc worse on purpose, just to ensure they get the best value for money from their excess, i.e to ensure they get a replacement?
I'm with Direct Line, fully comp. The terms and conditions can be summarised as follows:
The excess is 10 GBP for windscreen repair, 75 GBP for windscreen replacement.
The insurer decides whether to repair, or replace, the windscreen.
Included in the windscreen cover is repair of any bodywork scratches caused by broken glass.
NCD is not affected if claims are made under this section of the policy.
Maximum payout is capped at the market value of the car minus the excess.
I have to use the "approved windscreen supplier" (Autoglass) if I want them to cover it in this way. If I don't use Autoglass, the excess still applies and the maximum payout is capped at 40 GBP for repair and 125 GBP for replacement.
The excess is 10 GBP for windscreen repair, 75 GBP for windscreen replacement.
The insurer decides whether to repair, or replace, the windscreen.
Included in the windscreen cover is repair of any bodywork scratches caused by broken glass.
NCD is not affected if claims are made under this section of the policy.
Maximum payout is capped at the market value of the car minus the excess.
I have to use the "approved windscreen supplier" (Autoglass) if I want them to cover it in this way. If I don't use Autoglass, the excess still applies and the maximum payout is capped at 40 GBP for repair and 125 GBP for replacement.
I recently needed the rear screen replaced on my car. Excess was £90 but if I did not use the recommended repairers then claims were limited to something around £500. The policy wording was not totally clear and as I needed the glass replaced without delay decided to use the recommended suppliers.
Turns out they used a screen, trim and seal from the main dealer and the parts alone came to over £500.
Turns out they used a screen, trim and seal from the main dealer and the parts alone came to over £500.
It would seem like some insurers have finally woken up to the fact that the repairs that are done by their nominated suppliers are so few and far between that they are not even worth paying for!
In a recent survey Autoglass were only able to attempt just 16% of front screen damage anyway, whereas a competent repair company was able to attempt 84%! Quite a difference. Even when they were able to repair their system did not allow the resin to adequately penetrate the damage for certain types of breaks as they were banned from drilling the break which meant that most repairs didn't actually serve any real purpose at all ( as they were not structurally sound ) other than to make money for them and exclude anyone else from doing the job,
There were so many exclusions that reduced what they would even consider repairing. For example if you had an MOT failure Autoglass would even refuse that on the grounds it was over 10mm in the drivers vision and in their opinion it would need a new screen despite the fact that it could be competently repaired by most other repairers.
They also refuse to repair 50mm from the edge of the screen which incidentally is the part of the screen that leads to 80% of screens cracking.
This trend was implemented by Farmers insurance in the USA.
Don't get me started on the legality of charging a different excess for different suppliers!
In a recent survey Autoglass were only able to attempt just 16% of front screen damage anyway, whereas a competent repair company was able to attempt 84%! Quite a difference. Even when they were able to repair their system did not allow the resin to adequately penetrate the damage for certain types of breaks as they were banned from drilling the break which meant that most repairs didn't actually serve any real purpose at all ( as they were not structurally sound ) other than to make money for them and exclude anyone else from doing the job,
There were so many exclusions that reduced what they would even consider repairing. For example if you had an MOT failure Autoglass would even refuse that on the grounds it was over 10mm in the drivers vision and in their opinion it would need a new screen despite the fact that it could be competently repaired by most other repairers.
They also refuse to repair 50mm from the edge of the screen which incidentally is the part of the screen that leads to 80% of screens cracking.
This trend was implemented by Farmers insurance in the USA.
Don't get me started on the legality of charging a different excess for different suppliers!
Edited by zap mc on Friday 3rd January 02:53
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff