Swift cover car insurance-warning

albotross1

please be aware that swiftcover have terms and conditions in their car insurance policies that try and force you to use their own approved repairer.
if you have a car that is still covered under the manufacturers warranty for paintwork or corrosion, you will invalidate your warranty if the repairs are not carried out by a manufacturer approved repairer.
swift will say that if you choose a repairer other than theirs, they may charge you the difference between what it costs and what they could get the repairs done for.
in addition to this policy states that they can use non manufacturers parts to complete the repair.
if you value your car do not insure with swiftcover, it is a budget cost insurance company that does not give you the consumer the choice to repair your car where they choose.
exercise your LEGAL RIGHT to choose your repairer and do not let an insurance company dictate this.

jase1

Thanks. I use Swift for my car but it is more than three years old, and I'm not too bothered about whether any repairs are done by the dealer or not.

I will bear this post in mind if I ever find myself with a car under manufacturer warranty.

Inactive

Thanks for the tip, good advice, but I never use " budget " insurers.

False economy.;)

Quentin

Also bear in mind they make you agree that they can use recycled parts when repairing your car.

A claim for a windscreen replacement results in the loss of your NCD for that policy year.

And they include the unenforceable clause that says you must have a current MOT.

jase1

Inactive wrote: »

Thanks for the tip, good advice, but I never use " budget " insurers.

False economy.;)

Always used budget insurers for cheaper cars as their comprehensive quotes are often cheaper than the TPFT I'd normally have bought on the old nails I've owned in the past.

And as I have only ever had one accident, which wrote the car off in any case (and for which I got nearly £1000 above book back for the car).

At the end of the day, cheap, perhaps poor quality comprehensive trumps TPFT as you're guaranteed nothing with the latter

Inactive

jase1 wrote: »

At the end of the day, cheap, perhaps poor quality comprehensive trumps TPFT as you're guaranteed nothing with the latter

No argument with that, but Insurance is service based, I just like the peace of mind that a good insurer brings, TBH they do not cost very much more than the likes of Swift etc.

jase1

Well a lot depends on whether you class £75-100 as a lot of money. I'd rather have it in my back-pocket (£75 * 15 years * 2 cars = £2250 I've most likely saved over the years). Horses for courses.

Now having said that I'll probably now be spanked on the way home. But hey that;s what makes life interesting eh?

Inactive

jase1 wrote: »

Well a lot depends on whether you class £75-100 as a lot of money. I'd rather have it in my back-pocket (£75 * 15 years * 2 cars = £2250 I've most likely saved over the years). Horses for courses.

Nowhere near that amount of difference on mine, about £ 20/25 per annum, so hardly worth the risk of using a " budget " company.

jase1

Actually leading on from this, what constitutes a budget company anyway? Swift for sure, and presumably Budget, Direct Line etc as well. But what about the white-label ones like Asda etc? (Just thinking back to the ones I've used in recent years).

Quentin

jase1 wrote: »

At the end of the day, cheap, perhaps poor quality comprehensive trumps TPFT as you're guaranteed nothing with the latter

The flaw in all this is if you are involved in an incident with an innocent third party.

With decent insurers (comp or tpft) you can rely on them to deal with the third party without you getting involved.

But read up on peoples experiences and you see that swift seem happy to ignore innocent third parties correspondence, and this results in unpleasant court summonses arriving through policyholders letterboxes years after the event.

jase1

TBH you're probably right. I've never been in an accident that was my fault, and involved a third party (well, other than Darlington Town Council, ahem). It's a difficult one though because I'd be inclined to disbelieve that sharp practices are restricted solely to the cheaper suppliers, especially when most of them are little more than subsidiaries of the "premium" brands in any case (Swift=AXA for example).