Insurers Need to be Clearer About the Cover They Provide
Discussion
Time and time again I'm asked if an insurer will allow a policyholder to nominate their own windscreen repairer.
The answer isn't always whether they will or will not, but how easy - or hard - it will be to get around the restrictions which the policyholder agreed to before inception. Herein lies the issue. I don't think the insurer makes it clear. If you can find the relevant bit - if - it will be ambiguous and full of jargon. Some of it doesn't actually tell you what you need to know for in the event of a claim scenario which is why you're paying for the product in the first place!
I'm speaking as someone who has helped many motorists and car owners successfully hop, skip and jump their way through a windscreen claim, without being steered towards a glass company they were being forced to use by their insurance company, a company they would never have used given the choice. I also speak as a consumer trying to insure not only my company vans, but my own cars too. Today I had the enviable pleasure of trying to insure my wife's new car. "It takes just FIVE minutes to get a quote" they say. Three comparison sites later and half a dozen selected insurers later, I found a suitable policy on offer. It wasn't the cheapest, but was at 'that end' of the market. The only thing missing was Breakdown Cover (but could have been added for 'as little as' £29.99).
As it was on a referral site, I had to 'go to the provider' from there. One click: wallop. On the summary it showed all the ticks relevant to the policy such as glass cover, legal expenses and the like. There was also Breakdown Cover. It was included. This may well be a glitch or an error but I've had it before with an Adrian Flux quote; how many people would have clicked and added it to basket without realising that it was included in the package? Furthermore, I wanted to see a) who the underwriter was (which tells me more about what would happen in the event of a claim) and b) what the windscreen cover actually covered in terms of approved repairers and excess. There were 32 pages of a PDF to comb through. Here's the bit I eventually found in the Policy Wording 'specimen' which took quite a bit of weeding to find, I hasten to add!
Remember, all this in a space of time which should be reasonable to understand so that you can make an informed decision about what is being proposed. The reality of this is, nobody actually goes this far because it's a long walk to get there (and I applaud you if you're still reading, BTW). By now, most people would have bagged the policy (within the five minutes they say you can) and got on with their day. They don't want the agg; that agg comes in the event of a claim...
"I'm insured with Blah-de-Blah. Can I choose you for my windscreen replacement?"
Ummmm....
The answer isn't always whether they will or will not, but how easy - or hard - it will be to get around the restrictions which the policyholder agreed to before inception. Herein lies the issue. I don't think the insurer makes it clear. If you can find the relevant bit - if - it will be ambiguous and full of jargon. Some of it doesn't actually tell you what you need to know for in the event of a claim scenario which is why you're paying for the product in the first place!
I'm speaking as someone who has helped many motorists and car owners successfully hop, skip and jump their way through a windscreen claim, without being steered towards a glass company they were being forced to use by their insurance company, a company they would never have used given the choice. I also speak as a consumer trying to insure not only my company vans, but my own cars too. Today I had the enviable pleasure of trying to insure my wife's new car. "It takes just FIVE minutes to get a quote" they say. Three comparison sites later and half a dozen selected insurers later, I found a suitable policy on offer. It wasn't the cheapest, but was at 'that end' of the market. The only thing missing was Breakdown Cover (but could have been added for 'as little as' £29.99).
As it was on a referral site, I had to 'go to the provider' from there. One click: wallop. On the summary it showed all the ticks relevant to the policy such as glass cover, legal expenses and the like. There was also Breakdown Cover. It was included. This may well be a glitch or an error but I've had it before with an Adrian Flux quote; how many people would have clicked and added it to basket without realising that it was included in the package? Furthermore, I wanted to see a) who the underwriter was (which tells me more about what would happen in the event of a claim) and b) what the windscreen cover actually covered in terms of approved repairers and excess. There were 32 pages of a PDF to comb through. Here's the bit I eventually found in the Policy Wording 'specimen' which took quite a bit of weeding to find, I hasten to add!
The Wording said:
If the glass in the front windscreen, side, rear windows, or sunroof of the car is damaged during the period of insurance the insurer will pay the cost of repairing or replacing it. The insurer will also pay for any repair to thebodywork of the car that has been damaged by broken glass from the windscreen or windows.
Seems quite reassuring, right? But who actually carries out the work? What if the car I'm trying to insure is say, a tricky windscreen install and best done by a specialist? Will I be getting genuine 'OE' parts? If the car is still under warranty, can I get the work done at a franchised dealership? It wasn't clear...The Policy Wording went on and said:
If the repair or replacement is carried out by one of our approved suppliers, cover is unlimited. (To contact one of our approved suppliers please refer to the ‘Making a claim section’ of this policy.) If you choose to use your own supplier, then cover will be limited to £150 less any excess. A claim under this section only will not affect your no claims discount.
A few more minutes later I found the Making a Claim bit and it didn't really make it much clearer about what I wanted to know:the Making a Claim bit said:
If you have comprehensive cover and your claim is for the car windscreen, side or rear windows, or the sunroof, please contact our claims department on 0330 XOX OXOX. Claims under this section will not affect your no claims discount. If the glass has to be replaced the glass excess shown on your Schedule of Insurance will be payable.•If you do not have comprehensive cover, you can still call the claims department but you will have to pay the cost of the replacement or repair.
I happen to know that the number is not for the insurer's Claims Department. It's for the 'approved' repairer who will answer it in a way that makes you think that it is the insurer. Remember, all this in a space of time which should be reasonable to understand so that you can make an informed decision about what is being proposed. The reality of this is, nobody actually goes this far because it's a long walk to get there (and I applaud you if you're still reading, BTW). By now, most people would have bagged the policy (within the five minutes they say you can) and got on with their day. They don't want the agg; that agg comes in the event of a claim...
"I'm insured with Blah-de-Blah. Can I choose you for my windscreen replacement?"
Ummmm....
Red Leader said:
Glassman, that's make an interesting read and I do agree with the majority of what you say, however:
1) The majority of the insurance buying public are only concerned about 1 thing and that is price.
2) Does it really matter who is replacing your windscreen or repairing your car so long as it is done correctly and comes with guarantees etc.?
3) The FCA regulators have put so many procedures and disclosures in place the 32 page pdf's are necessary I am afraid.
RL
Yes, agree on the price (so many people are insured with one cheap quote insurer in particular who is THE worst to deal with in the event of a claim). 1) The majority of the insurance buying public are only concerned about 1 thing and that is price.
2) Does it really matter who is replacing your windscreen or repairing your car so long as it is done correctly and comes with guarantees etc.?
3) The FCA regulators have put so many procedures and disclosures in place the 32 page pdf's are necessary I am afraid.
RL
Re who replaces your windscreen, well, it does with some cars (or some car owners). Take a look at the industry's more known installers and have a look at not what reviews they're getting on review sites (and social media platforms) but what some of their employees are saying. It makes for some grim reading (links available on request). If you saw these were the approved repairers after reading the stuff available online, you'd be silly.
Understand about regs. But when give someone a restriction and if it means gaining the edge in business they'll find a way around it. Under it. Through it.
Red Leader said:
Most insurers will get a "discounted" rate from a specific windscreen installer which is why they want you to use this "approved" company, same as vehicle repairs.
Yes, and for example I know that one particular insurer has an agreement with the approved repairer at a ridiculously low average invoice value deal. The repairer relies on the volume or exclusivity but that's not enough; they have to use cheaper materials to make it viable, hence the (very misleading) statements of the glass they fit being 'as good as' or even 'made by the same as the original' when the truth is it's a cheap copy of the original. In any case, if you've just paid 40-grand for a car why should you accept a part with a brand name that sounds like it should be available with pak choi and black bean sauce?! There's also the question of ADAS equipment (or anything electrical in, or connected to the windscreen). If the car is under warranty the manufacturer will not entertain any warranty claims if the windscreen in question is not a genuine part. For all intents and purposes, the warranty in that situation will be deemed null and void. The same applies to body repairs. I know the owner of an accident repair centre who has to work to rates and hours determined by the insurer. He cannot even order parts himself; even that part of his business is controlled by that particular insurer. Yet he's the 'local' approved repairer. No discounted rates there. He gets what he's given. It's easy to say that they don't have a gun to his head but he employs 15 people and every year the margins he's working to means the business is hand-to-mouth. He loves a non fault job, but he's bent so far over a barrel he cannot afford to take his eye off the ball with the insurer on his back for every job, wanting it finished yesterday.
Red Leader said:
the value in quality cover over cheap
It's this. I see it more and more mainly because the cars are more expensive or the owners are that much more detail oriented. The general public is where the numbers are and that equals business. I've spent a long time helping customers with their 'cheaper' insurance company quotes. You don't always get the desired outcome but a win is a win. The premium product end of the market: no problem. It's almost as easy as getting cheap car insurance.
akirk said:
ollie j said:
A very interesting topic.
Glassman, from your experience of dealing with numerous insurers:
Are you able to name any insurers that allow a customer to specify who they wish to fit a new/repair an existing windscreen without a restriction on their contribution (such as the £150 you mention in your OP)?
This would be instead of having to use the usual household name...
It sounds like Chubb might be one of the better insurers when it comes to windscreen/glass based on akirk's comment above.
I would suspect that any of the better insurance policies will be more flexible - I was Hiscox previously and they were very flexible - even to the extent that they were prepared to let me look at having a bespoke heated screen made up for the Z3 and only pay the cost above their cost to replace with the normal screen...Glassman, from your experience of dealing with numerous insurers:
Are you able to name any insurers that allow a customer to specify who they wish to fit a new/repair an existing windscreen without a restriction on their contribution (such as the £150 you mention in your OP)?
This would be instead of having to use the usual household name...
It sounds like Chubb might be one of the better insurers when it comes to windscreen/glass based on akirk's comment above.
but you are looking at expensive private client type policies...
That said, if you're more aware of what might happen in a claim situation you can make better choices. I asked an insurer to remove a component of my cover. "Can't do that".
I once asked a proposing insurer is there were any conditions or restrictions on using approved/non-approved repairers. He said no. When I pushed him his exact words were, "We will pay any amount as long as you use Autoslags." It's not what I asked him but he couldn't articulate any other answer. It turned out he didn't actually know that there WAS NOT a restriction and you COULD nominate your own repairer (albeit subject to a higher excess). This only became crystal clear when I asked him to add it in writing to my policy and "put it on file".
That policy (which I had for three years on a previous vehicle) was with Equity aka ERS.
Philv8s said:
I think I got lucky replacing my windscreen last year as the computer didn’t recognise my car model (Alpina) so I pointed the call handler to BMW to clarify what was required.
Without specifying or paying a premium I got an OEM screen fitted. The installer was surprised that I was getting a genuine BMW screen without asking for it specifically.
This is another one. If the policyholder insists or even requests an OE part, some insurers say there will be a supplement to pay. This needs to be stated in the policy. Indemnity is - or should be - assumed as like-for-like. Without specifying or paying a premium I got an OEM screen fitted. The installer was surprised that I was getting a genuine BMW screen without asking for it specifically.
Wills2 said:
On the point of OEM screens vs a pattern part replacement, I had a bit of row with autoglass regarding this, my F80 M3 was 2 years old and the screen needed replacing, they brought non BMW screen and I said no, the fitter argued my car was old so what's the issue (WTF?) I told him to go away and bring back a BMW screen as the car was still in warranty so needed a BMW screen, eventually they agreed. It pays to stand your ground sometimes.
Standing you ground is one thing but if you have a policy where it states use of aftermarket/pattern parts, you're legally obliged to stand back down and take it like a man. Pothole said:
Similar length of time, never needed one.
I worked for Autoglass for 6 months despatching technicians. I think we probably had 1 complaint a fortnight, if that. As a percentage of jobs completed I reckon it was pretty small.
Have you seen the visitor posts on their FB page? I worked for Autoglass for 6 months despatching technicians. I think we probably had 1 complaint a fortnight, if that. As a percentage of jobs completed I reckon it was pretty small.
In terms of jobs dispatched v disgruntled customers it must, naturally, still be a small percentage.
If, in the event of a claim, you are directed to 'A N Other Windscreens', and it turns out they have a poor Trust Pilot score, given the choice you probably wouldn't be too keen to use that company (especially if 60% of their reviews were rated poor).
Yet an insurance policy will stipulate you must use (as agreed) to use them or pretty much pay for the damage yourself if not.
I had this with a customer very recently. He needed a new windscreen for his 997 and did not want any issues. As it turned out his policy directed him to what he had accepted; as far as he knew at the time it was what he understood to be a broad term under 'windscreen cover'. In the policy breakdown he later discovered that the cover was subject to him using the nominated repairer (if not the most the insurer would contribute is £150). When he researched this (well known) windscreen company, he found their reviews were enough to scare anyone. Had he known before policy inception that this would be the case, he may have asked for the restriction to be lifted or perhaps even look for an alternative underwriter.
Yet an insurance policy will stipulate you must use (as agreed) to use them or pretty much pay for the damage yourself if not.
I had this with a customer very recently. He needed a new windscreen for his 997 and did not want any issues. As it turned out his policy directed him to what he had accepted; as far as he knew at the time it was what he understood to be a broad term under 'windscreen cover'. In the policy breakdown he later discovered that the cover was subject to him using the nominated repairer (if not the most the insurer would contribute is £150). When he researched this (well known) windscreen company, he found their reviews were enough to scare anyone. Had he known before policy inception that this would be the case, he may have asked for the restriction to be lifted or perhaps even look for an alternative underwriter.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff