Advice on Chipped windscreen

mikey72

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Something worth checking then Mikey, I for one will not let my car into the hands of such as ADC or similar. Which ensurers actually stipulate who you must use????????????????????

I've seen them on here tbh, but I can't remember the companies who limit repair costs as well as windscreen.

Ecar was one for the windscreen, someone got caught by using National I think it was, Ecar refused to pay, Ecar terms are

"Provided You contact the Glass Help Line on 0845 219 0594 to arrange for replacement or repair of Your windscreen or windows, the cover supplied by this Policy will be unlimited. However, if any other repairer is used then cover will be restricted to £100.00 less the standard Excess.
Any payment under Section 6 solely for the breakage of Your windscreen"

Glassman

Use our nominated repairer and the over is unlimited. Go with one you choose and we'll only cough up the what's left out of 100-quid after you've paid your excess.

It has to be admired tbf.

roddydogs

Glassman wrote: »

This would be a failed attempt. If you paid, or signed the job card for your insurer to be billed, this is not far from fraud.

So your saying a "Repair" should be completely invisible?

Glassman

roddydogs wrote: »

So your saying a "Repair" should be completely invisible?

No, I'm commenting on what you said earlier in this thread:

roddydogs wrote:

When I had a "Repair" there was no difference in the looks.

There will always be some evidence of a completed repair; some will look better than others but the bottom line is, you will always see something.

When the repairer told you the job was done, did you question it?

cyclonebri1

When I had a chip repaired the improvement was 50% at best, and the mot man let it go when I explained it had been treated and was reduced in size from what it was previously, far from "invisible" tho'.

Back on the insurance issue and more particularly regardling bodywork repairs I cannot see it being legal that an insurer can specify a particular repair outfit providrd all parties quoting for the job ore ratified by the institute of motor repairers or what ever it is, and give similar quotes. Yes you will not get the contractual loan car, but to be honest I'd sooner have the repair done by a reputable company and know who to take it back to if there was an issue.
I was thinking along the same lines as the glassman in that I have taken out insurance for said car, I will not give them the right to take it out of my possesion and deal with it at the cheapest, least skilled place they are invested in.:eek:

Anyway anyone shed any further light on how far they can push you in the direction of their specified repairer?

rev_henry

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

When I had a chip repaired the improvement was 50% at best, and the mot man let it go when I explained it had been treated and was reduced in size from what it was previously, far from "invisible" tho'.

Back on the insurance issue and more particularly regardling bodywork repairs I cannot see it being legal that an insurer can specify a particular repair outfit providrd all parties quoting for the job ore ratified by the institute of motor repairers or what ever it is, and give similar quotes. Yes you will not get the contractual loan car, but to be honest I'd sooner have the repair done by a reputable company and know who to take it back to if there was an issue.
I was thinking along the same lines as the glassman in that I have taken out insurance for said car, I will not give them the right to take it out of my possesion and deal with it at the cheapest, least skilled place they are invested in.:eek:

Anyway anyone shed any further light on how far they can push you in the direction of their specified repairer?

I guess you could go down the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations route... It would be quite difficult but certainly a possibility.

Glassman

'tis a consumer issue.

If enough voiced their opinion, it's possible to call in a review of the situation. But if anything is to even be considered, there needs to be a proposal / possible solution thrown in too (this is to say that the issue is highlighted as a problem).

dacouch

Glassman wrote: »

If it's contractual,. it should be pre-disclosed; it isn't and therefore it is not - and there are many contradictions of the rule.

The insurance company own the liability, not the car or the policyholder. It is frustrating for everyone when there are stipulations put in place, but these will only become known when there is a call for the facility to be used.

Playing devils advocate

The Policy Document which is available at point of sale will contain the restrictions regarding windscreen cover and using the Insurers approved repairers or not using the approved repairers.

cyclonebri1

dacouch wrote: »

Playing devils advocate

The Policy Document which is available at point of sale will contain the restrictions regarding windscreen cover and using the Insurers approved repairers or not using the approved repairers.

And playing the opposing devils advocate;

Who has a policy stating they HAVE to go with the insurers appointed rep????

Glassman

dacouch wrote: »

Playing devils advocate

The Policy Document which is available at point of sale will contain the restrictions regarding windscreen cover and using the Insurers approved repairers or not using the approved repairers.

You raise an interesting and valid point. I would say if the eventualities of what these probable outcomes are were questioned at POS, the broker or insurer would - or should - make the situaion clear. However, not many people do ask; of those that do, some are told to either call the 'help line' or, to call the issuer of the policy so that they can advise from that point on.