Unacceptable AA policy changes

spacey2012

The following amendment to AA breakdown cover in my opinion is unacceptable:
The AA have actually made over 20 changes or limitations to the cover they provide.
I would recommend you read these very carefully, I find the following particularly disturbing.
Section 3:
Service shall not be provided where the Fault has been identified by the AA for a breakdown of the same vehicle within the preceding 28 days and has re-occurred because of your failure to act upon the AA recommendation.
This was discretionary before, it is now compulsory.

Anyone with any motoring experience and a modern vehicle knows it is perfectly practical for that vehicle to suffer the same fault within 28 days even if you have acted upon it by taking the car to a garage.
In days of Electronic diagnostics and limp home enthusiastic cars, you can have a EML one week, have it fixed and be back in limp home the next for the same thing.
To limit breakdown cover to onece every 28 days on the excuse the car had a similar fault before is ridicules and certainly not cover 365 days as they claim.
You may have one breakdown every 5 years, you may have two in one week, that is how cars work.
But to change what was a policy where you could say "hey listen I had this fixed" To one of "tough" call back in 28 days has made this service totally unacceptable, I want cover 365 days of the year, not once every 28 days and if the same fault occurs after a fix, then tough, that is WHY I pay break down cover.
I have been a Member for 28 years.
This is the straw for the camels back.

Any recommendation for alternatives that wont leave me stranded with stupid policy restrictions.

Hintza

It doesn't sound too bad to me. This is stop people hogging the AA service and using to keep cars running with no intention to get it repaired permanently.

If you genuinely feel that the problem might re-occur it might help if you keep a copy of the invoice in the car to show them.

laidbackgjr

If you have attempted to fix a problem (and have the garage invoice or receipt for parts to prove it), then the AA will cover a repeat breakdown, which is fine by me. What they will not cover is a breakdown for a repeat problem that you have made no attempt to fix. Seems very sensible to me.

ILW

spacey2012 wrote: »

The following amendment to AA breakdown cover in my opinion is unacceptable:
The AA have actually made over 20 changes or limitations to the cover they provide.
I would recommend you read these very carefully, I find the following particularly disturbing.
Section 3:
Service shall not be provided where the Fault has been identified by the AA for a breakdown of the same vehicle within the preceding 28 days and has re-occurred because of your failure to act upon the AA recommendation.
This was discretionary before, it is now compulsory.

Anyone with any motoring experience and a modern vehicle knows it is perfectly practical for that vehicle to suffer the same fault within 28 days even if you have acted upon it by taking the car to a garage.
In days of Electronic diagnostics and limp home enthusiastic cars, you can have a EML one week, have it fixed and be back in limp home the next for the same thing.
To limit breakdown cover to onece every 28 days on the excuse the car had a similar fault before is ridicules and certainly not cover 365 days as they claim.
You may have one breakdown every 5 years, you may have two in one week, that is how cars work.
But to change what was a policy where you could say "hey listen I had this fixed" To one of "tough" call back in 28 days has made this service totally unacceptable, I want cover 365 days of the year, not once every 28 days and if the same fault occurs after a fix, then tough, that is WHY I pay break down cover.
I have been a Member for 28 years.
This is the straw for the camels back.

Any recommendation for alternatives that wont leave me stranded with stupid policy restrictions.

You seem to be ignoring the highlighted phrase.

spacey2012

Very un -acceptable to me I am afraid.
The policy is now compulsory, cars do breakdown again and again for the same trivial faults that garages can find it difficult to repair.
The policy is too ambiguous, What is a recommendation ?.
Will they issue a dictate of what work they think should be done and if the main dealer does not carry it out they wont help ?
A roadside Technician is qualified to issue this advice ? After a six week course ?
The policy before, gave them the discretion to refuse the pee taking claimers.
But to have a similar fault, or even have them claim so,
How would they know over a telephone call from the hard shoulder of a motorway if it is the same fault.
If you think you can rely on such a service and pay for it, your mad.
I dont care why my car has broken down, i want the cover i pay for, once every 5 years or twice in the same week.
Would you take the chance of them leaving you stranded on the hard shoulder ?
They are history.

maninthestreet

Ok, so take your custom elsewhere??

ILW

I would guess they are getting sick of going to the same cars week after week in the cold weather, starting them with the the same knackered battery or worn out plugs.

mauriphonic

I don't see the issue. If you've taken it in to be fixed after the original callout, they will attend from my interpretation of that clause. If you haven't had it attended to, and they told you what the problem was, its your own lookout and a risk of using a car that has not yet been repaired.

If it remains unresolved I don't see that they should be expected to come back out to a car with an unaddressed inherent problem. In real terms I'd expect that they'd come anyway, but would charge for it in addition to the policy cost.