Insurer refusing manufacturer‑approved repair on a car under warranty

TWDave

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043786#Comment_82043786

The policy does not state the fixed amount, or any figure. It says this: "If you use your
own repairer, we will only pay the cost that we were told by our own repairer." - It wouldn't be honest for me to say I had absorbed this fully before signing up, but I don't think I would have absorbed that meant they could use a fixed price, below the amount it would actually cost, as the basis for the comparison. I also wouldn't have assumed a repair that puts the warranty at risk would be something the insurer would propose.

I've been a car owner for 25 years and never had an accident in a car that was under warranty so this is not something I have ever had to consider before! I will learn lessons from this though.

If the FOS can help me get assurance that the insurers own repairer can repair in a way that clearly protects the warranty, and that is done in a way that the FOS has stated is good enough, then I don't think I will have a problem accepting it. I go back to I don't actually want to chose my own repairer, I just want the car repaired in a way that is clearly and unambiguously in accordance with the warranty conditions.

TWDave

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043790#Comment_82043790

I understand your hypothetical, the Kia approved repairer has quoted including all parts so the plan (that the insurer is refusing to approve and pay for) includes genuine Kia parts (that cost more than the fixed price the insurer is saying they can do the entire job for).

I (naively perhaps) believe that the insurance industry and large insurers (which this is, Google tells me they insure several hundred thousand vehicles) should be able to deal with this. Manufacturer warranties are a standard thing, Kia is a common car company (Google tells me over 1 million of them on UK roads). There should be a clear way for insurers to say this is how we are going to repair cars under warranty and for the Manufacturer to confirm (in an overarching way not case by case) that that is fine.

I've found it really surprising that it is left to me to decide whether I'm satisfied, whether I think the risk is acceptable. Between these two companies in these two industries that must see this situation all the time, why can't they be clear and unambiguous?

MyRealNameToo

According to uSwitch there are 44m policies sold a year, so if they are holding 0.4m then they are a relatively modest brand. By comparison Admiral group are circa 6m vehicles. It its is One Insurance then they have more like 150,000 policies

One Insurance, I'm guessing, the only one I can think if so then read https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-4873643.pdf which is a very similar FOS decision on One Insurance, unfortunately it wasnt upheld

Woodstok2000

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043832#Comment_82043832

They said:

"all repairs are completed in accordance with the manufacturer’s approved repair methods and industry standards.”

How much clearer could they be without requiring them to guarantee a future Kia standard they have no control over? They are never going to guarantee that Kia will or won't do something at some unspecified point in the future, so what could they say that would satisfy you?

TWDave

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043995#Comment_82043995

This is really helpful, thank you. I think the difference that hopefully the FOS would take into account is that 'Ms N' only had a bodywork and paintwork warranty that the FOS considered wouldn't be affected by the insurers repair. The Kia standard warranty is a full comprehensive warranty including power train, chassis, electrical including wiring and advanced driver assistance systems, which have greater chances of being adversely effected by a non manufacturer approved repair given the damage to the car and the area being repaired.

TWDave

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82044016#Comment_82044016

So when I first read that I was reassured, so I went back to them to say so if in the future I have an issue where Kia dismisses a warranty claim as a result of your repair, you will cover it, they said no.

If the insurer repairs it in a way that they consider 'in accordance with the manufacturer's approved repair methods and industry standards' and then there is later a problem whereby Kia refuses to approve a warranty repair because in their view the insurers repair was not 'in accordance with the manufacturer's approved repair methods and industry standards' where does that leave me?

Why, given this is a standard warranty on a standard spec car from a common manufacturer, all of which will have been entirely expected for the car when they sold the policy, can they not give me assurance directly, or working with Kia (and other common manufacturers) to unambiguously say and guarantee the warranty will be unaffected.

Woodstok2000

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82044145#Comment_82044145

Theyre never going to give that kind of guarantee as there are way too many variables and unknowns. The bottom line is that Kia have said a repair in line with their standards won't invalidate the warranty. The insurer has said the repair will be in line with Kia standards. Wanting more than that from either side is wishful thinking.

brianposter

It says this: "If you use your own repairer, we will only pay the cost that we were told by our own repairer."

Would this clause get past a court ?

TWDave

Good morning all. Thank you for all your thoughts on this. The close to consensus seems to be that I am unlikely to achieve what I am after. In the long term the lesson is more closely read and clarify terms before I sign up, don't assume things are standard unless they explicitly say so, and when under warranty if this is important to me probably buy a specialist insurance policy through the manufacturer.

In the short term I suspect I need to try to extracate myself from this situation. With the choice I am being given, I'm not going to pay an amount that equals well over half what the car is at best worth to perfectly maintain the warranty so I guess I have to accept the insurer's repairer. I need to clarify what the situation is with the manufacturer approved repairer that has had my car for a month and provided me with a courtesy car for a month. Whilst at no point have they indicated there would be any charges due to me if I was unsuccessful, in fact they were giving me the impression there was little doubt I wouldn't be successful - I'm anticipating an issue.

Mostly I am considering taking this action because the timelines as I understand it are the insurer has at least another month before the FOS will accept the case unless they produce a deadlock letter before then, and they seem in no rush. The FOS then it seems could take months to allocate the case to one of their staff, and then could take months to come to a decision - which I now see would probably go in the insurers favour.

I find myself thinking of I'm likely to lose, the costs that I might have to pay for 6 months use of a courtesy car and 6 months storage costs for my car, if the manufacturer approved repairer charges them could be massive. It's also costing us at least £20 more a week to run the petrol courtesy car than our EV would be costing.

If I looked to withdraw the complaint from the insurer and FOS and let the insurer collect the car and repair it at their repairer, does anyone think I would be making a mistake from where I am at this point?

MyRealNameToo

Very few complaints go the full 8 weeks before a final response is given, the majority that do are on vastly more complex issues than a simple complaint about repairs -v- warranty. The main reason complaints go on more than a week is either that there are several third parties involved (eg suppliers, engineers, loss adjusters) or simply backlogs.

I dont think you have a great case but without the details it's hard to say definitely. There are two separate decisions though, if to withdraw the complaint and if to proceed with repairs. It's perfectly possible to have the vehicle repaired but to continue the complaint. If the FOS were to uphold the complaint after the repairs were done they could either require the insurer to make up for the loss of warranty or have them pay for an authorised firm to make good the repairs to reinstate the warranty.