Repairer Declined to Repair a Repairable Windscreen
Discussion
This warrants more awareness for posterity.
A chap in Hurstpierpoint picked up a chip on his windscreen. Although the marque is irrelevant, not all windscreen replacements are equal; some require more specialist experience than others; in this case: a Porsche Cayman 718. He contacted his insurer and he was immediately connected to their nominated repairer (they repair as well as replace). A consultation took place which led to the decision that a replacement would be necessary. The reason given: 'the chip is on a curved part of the windscreen'.
With a few exceptions, the overwhelming majority of windscreens are curved. Our chap started a thread to gauge opinion.
After a second opinion from the people who repair (the people who also replace) it was confirmed that the damage did not meet the repair criteria (their criteria). The ensuing discussion nudged the gentleman into discussing an appointment to have the windscreen replaced. That conversation took a twist of its own when he asked if the windscreen would be an original, 'OEM' part and was told that they're all the same (plus or minus a stamp). He insisted on an authentic Porsche part if he was to agree. At that point he was told he would be subject to a supplement. This was not discussed before policy inception (he couldn't see it anywhere in the Policy Schedule or Key Facts which would have been pre-disclosed so that he could make an informed decision about the proposal). Furthermore, anyone asked to pay a supplement is on a loser immediately on the basis that there is no indicator to what the repair and replace people would be charging for an aftermarket windscreen. For the record, he was told he would have to pay c£800 which was quantified as the difference. Guess how much a new Cayman windscreen - for that MY - is to buy from Porsche...
Mr Cayman understandably wasn't comfortable. The matter came to my attention and I was asked for advice.
Paying a supplement for a genuine part was clearly contentious. It was also unreasonable; potentially in breach of the terms as there was no indication of it anywhere in the policy. As much as there was a case in that respect, it didn't need to get that far; the damage was repairable: in terms of the overall size; its position; the type of break, and its age, all indicated a viable repair.
The people who repair and the people who replace follow standards set by the BSI who produce technical standards, certification, and standards-related services to businesses. However, each individual assessment is made (on behalf of the relevant underwriter) by the attending technician (some of the assessments are done online by way of a few questions). If there is a reason which he or she feels does not justify or warrant a repair, he or she will advise a replacement. It might be that the damage does not meet the repair criteria, or there may be another reason which 'might' come from the covert code of practice pamphlet: Doing What's Best for You.
Meanwhile, Mr Cayman agreed to my offer of a repair. He didn't fancy the odds given to him about replacing the windscreen but in any case, if it's a viable repair, why not? His windscreen got the stay of execution that he was hoping for and he was pleased with the result.
In terms of the cost, I suggested that by rights his insurance company not only should be covering it, but should be delighted to be paying it. Nope. They have offered him 40% of the invoice as a gesture.
This episode did not favour the consumer in any way whatsoever. He was told the chip cannot be repaired. He was then told the replacement would cost him an extra 800-odd sovs if he wanted an authentic Porsche part additional to his policy excess. Now that he's had the damage repaired - at a fraction of the cost - the insurance company don't really want to pay for it because the work was not done by their nominated repairer (!) and for that reason, they would only contribute a small part of it as a gesture of goodwill (their way of trying to keep him sweet enough for renewal).
After the work was done, Mr Cayman - a retired gentleman - decided against accepting the few quid offered by his insurer (it wasn't worth it) and also valued his time more than trying to argue with them about the whole matter. The reality is that most will move on and not bother with asking any pertinent questions. The insurance parties carry on regardless and the repairers live to fight another day.
Far too many windscreens are replaced when a repair would have been the viable, economical and most sensible option.
A chap in Hurstpierpoint picked up a chip on his windscreen. Although the marque is irrelevant, not all windscreen replacements are equal; some require more specialist experience than others; in this case: a Porsche Cayman 718. He contacted his insurer and he was immediately connected to their nominated repairer (they repair as well as replace). A consultation took place which led to the decision that a replacement would be necessary. The reason given: 'the chip is on a curved part of the windscreen'.
With a few exceptions, the overwhelming majority of windscreens are curved. Our chap started a thread to gauge opinion.
After a second opinion from the people who repair (the people who also replace) it was confirmed that the damage did not meet the repair criteria (their criteria). The ensuing discussion nudged the gentleman into discussing an appointment to have the windscreen replaced. That conversation took a twist of its own when he asked if the windscreen would be an original, 'OEM' part and was told that they're all the same (plus or minus a stamp). He insisted on an authentic Porsche part if he was to agree. At that point he was told he would be subject to a supplement. This was not discussed before policy inception (he couldn't see it anywhere in the Policy Schedule or Key Facts which would have been pre-disclosed so that he could make an informed decision about the proposal). Furthermore, anyone asked to pay a supplement is on a loser immediately on the basis that there is no indicator to what the repair and replace people would be charging for an aftermarket windscreen. For the record, he was told he would have to pay c£800 which was quantified as the difference. Guess how much a new Cayman windscreen - for that MY - is to buy from Porsche...
Mr Cayman understandably wasn't comfortable. The matter came to my attention and I was asked for advice.
Paying a supplement for a genuine part was clearly contentious. It was also unreasonable; potentially in breach of the terms as there was no indication of it anywhere in the policy. As much as there was a case in that respect, it didn't need to get that far; the damage was repairable: in terms of the overall size; its position; the type of break, and its age, all indicated a viable repair.
The people who repair and the people who replace follow standards set by the BSI who produce technical standards, certification, and standards-related services to businesses. However, each individual assessment is made (on behalf of the relevant underwriter) by the attending technician (some of the assessments are done online by way of a few questions). If there is a reason which he or she feels does not justify or warrant a repair, he or she will advise a replacement. It might be that the damage does not meet the repair criteria, or there may be another reason which 'might' come from the covert code of practice pamphlet: Doing What's Best for You.
Meanwhile, Mr Cayman agreed to my offer of a repair. He didn't fancy the odds given to him about replacing the windscreen but in any case, if it's a viable repair, why not? His windscreen got the stay of execution that he was hoping for and he was pleased with the result.
In terms of the cost, I suggested that by rights his insurance company not only should be covering it, but should be delighted to be paying it. Nope. They have offered him 40% of the invoice as a gesture.
This episode did not favour the consumer in any way whatsoever. He was told the chip cannot be repaired. He was then told the replacement would cost him an extra 800-odd sovs if he wanted an authentic Porsche part additional to his policy excess. Now that he's had the damage repaired - at a fraction of the cost - the insurance company don't really want to pay for it because the work was not done by their nominated repairer (!) and for that reason, they would only contribute a small part of it as a gesture of goodwill (their way of trying to keep him sweet enough for renewal).
After the work was done, Mr Cayman - a retired gentleman - decided against accepting the few quid offered by his insurer (it wasn't worth it) and also valued his time more than trying to argue with them about the whole matter. The reality is that most will move on and not bother with asking any pertinent questions. The insurance parties carry on regardless and the repairers live to fight another day.
Far too many windscreens are replaced when a repair would have been the viable, economical and most sensible option.
Edited by Glassman on Monday 12th August 10:41
Edited by Glassman on Monday 12th August 11:17
Thanks for this info Glassman, if you don't mind I have a question please;
About a year ago I bought a Rapide S from Leeds Aston Martin, on the drive home I picked up a couple of new stonechips on the windscreen - on inspection this meant there were now around 5 chips in various places, but none in the critical MOT zone.
As it was a new (to me) car I obvsiously wanted it to be as perfect as possible and started a claim fo a new windscreen as the number of chips as per the claim site warranted this.
Having competed this I paid the excess and awaited an appointent - in the meantime I googled to see what AM owner thought of that particular windscreen repairer or replacer and the view was that they seemed to be ok - but that I should request OEM glass.
Similar story to that above - eventually i was asked for an additional £400 odd for the OEM - for the AM that is still quite a bargain but still a surprise.
My question therefore relates to your point that not all replacements are equal - is it really better to request OEM or is the default much the same.
Ta.
About a year ago I bought a Rapide S from Leeds Aston Martin, on the drive home I picked up a couple of new stonechips on the windscreen - on inspection this meant there were now around 5 chips in various places, but none in the critical MOT zone.
As it was a new (to me) car I obvsiously wanted it to be as perfect as possible and started a claim fo a new windscreen as the number of chips as per the claim site warranted this.
Having competed this I paid the excess and awaited an appointent - in the meantime I googled to see what AM owner thought of that particular windscreen repairer or replacer and the view was that they seemed to be ok - but that I should request OEM glass.
Similar story to that above - eventually i was asked for an additional £400 odd for the OEM - for the AM that is still quite a bargain but still a surprise.
My question therefore relates to your point that not all replacements are equal - is it really better to request OEM or is the default much the same.
Ta.
I've got an RAC windscreen in one of my cars, which has been delaminating in a couple of corners since shortly after I got. Not sure how old the screen is though, but I've had the car about 8 or 9 years.
I think if I were to replace it, I'd get a second hand OEM screen rather than another aftermarket one.
Bit different to the two examples above as it's a massive produced car.
I think if I were to replace it, I'd get a second hand OEM screen rather than another aftermarket one.
Bit different to the two examples above as it's a massive produced car.
J2daG1990 said:
Maybe I'm being pedantic here, but is there any difference quality-wise between an OEM stamped windscreen and one that isn't?
Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
yes there can be...Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
I used to own an M5 e39 - had the windscreen replaced twice - both times on the insurance and both times with one of the biggest brands of companies who do windscreens...
Both times we went through a number of appointments for various reasons, though all the reasons were to do with their supply side not the technicians who were superb...
they initially fitted an OEM windscreen - looked identical, looked perfectly fine - but I discovered a couple of days later that if you wear polarising sunglasses in the car this oem windscreen's coating made rainbows dance across your horizon - slightly off-putting and no pots of gold sadly!
second appointment - another oem windscreen to check it wasn't just a quality issue with the first - same issue
third appointment - a BMW windscreen, except they were sent (by BMW) a rear windscreen, not front one!
fourth appointment - correct glass from BMW and all perfect - fitted beautifully and no dancing rainbows!
no additional costs and good humour all around...
J2daG1990 said:
Maybe I'm being pedantic here, but is there any difference quality-wise between an OEM stamped windscreen and one that isn't?
Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
Without question, there is a difference. Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
The Original Equipment part is made from a blueprint owned by the car manufacturer. With rare exception, these parts will have the 'stamp' on it which is all part of the silkprint (there's not someone at the end of the production line). We still refer to it as the silkprint but the printing of the black border (the frit) has evolved and is mostly printed digitally.
A windscreen that does not bear the car manufacturer's logo is not as good as or the same as one that does.
In some cases, a firm like Pilkington, Saint Gobain will be the appointed OEM for a model, and they might also produce an aftermarket equivalent to that which, effectively, is a copy. There's nothing official on the matter, but from what I know (and I'd rather not go on record to revealing where this information comes from) the process for producing an aftermarket windscreen (in this context) might be different to how the originals are manufactured. Usually, the font size on the (glass) manufacturer's codes and info printed on the glass will be (unmistakably) different in size or prominence. It might even have been printed slightly to the left, or a bit to the right of where the original one is.
Brands such as Nordglass (originally Polish, but now owned by Asahi Glass Co, Japan) XYG (Xynyi) Safeview, Starglass, Fu Yao, Shatterprufe, Benson, Lamisafe, Lamishield to name a few cater more for the budget end of glass. Even Pilkington (Japanese-owned) compete in this market. The only one that hasn't relinquished its position is Saint Gobain (Sekurit) although I am seeing some changes here and there.
The best available product is the OEM part.
JBW11 said:
Thanks for this info Glassman, if you don't mind I have a question please;
About a year ago I bought a Rapide S from Leeds Aston Martin, on the drive home I picked up a couple of new stonechips on the windscreen - on inspection this meant there were now around 5 chips in various places, but none in the critical MOT zone.
As it was a new (to me) car I obvsiously wanted it to be as perfect as possible and started a claim fo a new windscreen as the number of chips as per the claim site warranted this.
Having competed this I paid the excess and awaited an appointent - in the meantime I googled to see what AM owner thought of that particular windscreen repairer or replacer and the view was that they seemed to be ok - but that I should request OEM glass.
Similar story to that above - eventually i was asked for an additional £400 odd for the OEM - for the AM that is still quite a bargain but still a surprise.
My question therefore relates to your point that not all replacements are equal - is it really better to request OEM or is the default much the same.
Ta.
AFAIK, AM windscreens all come from NSG/Pilkington and I don't think there is a visible AM 'stamp' on the glass. The font size on the aftermarket glass is slightly larger than the AM supplied ones. About a year ago I bought a Rapide S from Leeds Aston Martin, on the drive home I picked up a couple of new stonechips on the windscreen - on inspection this meant there were now around 5 chips in various places, but none in the critical MOT zone.
As it was a new (to me) car I obvsiously wanted it to be as perfect as possible and started a claim fo a new windscreen as the number of chips as per the claim site warranted this.
Having competed this I paid the excess and awaited an appointent - in the meantime I googled to see what AM owner thought of that particular windscreen repairer or replacer and the view was that they seemed to be ok - but that I should request OEM glass.
Similar story to that above - eventually i was asked for an additional £400 odd for the OEM - for the AM that is still quite a bargain but still a surprise.
My question therefore relates to your point that not all replacements are equal - is it really better to request OEM or is the default much the same.
Ta.
Glassman said:
J2daG1990 said:
Maybe I'm being pedantic here, but is there any difference quality-wise between an OEM stamped windscreen and one that isn't?
Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
Without question, there is a difference. Surely no one buying a car would actually look to see if a windscreen has an OEM stamp on it somewhere and I can't see how this affects the value.
The Original Equipment part is made from a blueprint owned by the car manufacturer. With rare exception, these parts will have the 'stamp' on it which is all part of the silkprint (there's not someone at the end of the production line). We still refer to it as the silkprint but the printing of the black border (the frit) has evolved and is mostly printed digitally.
A windscreen that does not bear the car manufacturer's logo is not as good as or the same as one that does.
In some cases, a firm like Pilkington, Saint Gobain will be the appointed OEM for a model, and they might also produce an aftermarket equivalent to that which, effectively, is a copy. There's nothing official on the matter, but from what I know (and I'd rather not go on record to revealing where this information comes from) the process for producing an aftermarket windscreen (in this context) might be different to how the originals are manufactured. Usually, the font size on the (glass) manufacturer's codes and info printed on the glass will be (unmistakably) different in size or prominence. It might even have been printed slightly to the left, or a bit to the right of where the original one is.
Brands such as Nordglass (originally Polish, but now owned by Asahi Glass Co, Japan) XYG (Xynyi) Safeview, Starglass, Fu Yao, Shatterprufe, Benson, Lamisafe, Lamishield to name a few cater more for the budget end of glass. Even Pilkington (Japanese-owned) compete in this market. The only one that hasn't relinquished its position is Saint Gobain (Sekurit) although I am seeing some changes here and there.
The best available product is the OEM part.
Glassman said:
AFAIK, AM windscreens all come from NSG/Pilkington and I don't think there is a visible AM 'stamp' on the glass. The font size on the aftermarket glass is slightly larger than the AM supplied ones.
Many thanks Glassman, really appreciate you taking the time to respond.Simpo Two said:
Same goes for tyres. Having 'AM' or 'J' stamped on them doesn't make them any better, not does the omission of it make them illegal.
N rated tyres for Porsche are different as they are for BMW's. The OEM versions have different compounds.Back on to windscreens, my insurer were fine with a windscreen repair. I paid the independent repaireres invoice and claimed it off LV, less the £20 excess.
I have had less than successful dealings with the latger chains when swapping windscreens, for example bodging my rain sensor that fitted behind the rear view mirror with glue where they haddamaged it, and in another case, cutting through the glass bonding and slicing the fabric coating on the screen pillar trim. Animals.
Simpo Two said:
Same goes for tyres. Having 'AM' or 'J' stamped on them doesn't make them any better, not does the omission of it make them illegal.
You might be surprised.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COA630Juf_U
charltjr said:
Simpo Two said:
Same goes for tyres. Having 'AM' or 'J' stamped on them doesn't make them any better, not does the omission of it make them illegal.
You might be surprised.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COA630Juf_U
And even then, they would be on dodgy ground.
I've had 2 Pilkington replacement windscreens. Nothing wrong with the quality or fit of the glass, but - they did not have the original graduated tint and the black shaded (dotted) area at the top of the screen was less pronounced and a different shape.
The worst aspect was the pre-glued mirror attachment bracket was in a much lower position, and with the mirror attached, obstructed the view out the front.
Oh, and the little black bordered vin number window in the front left corner was out of position, obscuring the number. Original all the way- if it doesn't break the bank.
The (second) glass man was a star however, perfect fit.
The worst aspect was the pre-glued mirror attachment bracket was in a much lower position, and with the mirror attached, obstructed the view out the front.
Oh, and the little black bordered vin number window in the front left corner was out of position, obscuring the number. Original all the way- if it doesn't break the bank.
The (second) glass man was a star however, perfect fit.
5s Alive said:
I've had 2 Pilkington replacement windscreens. Nothing wrong with the quality or fit of the glass, but - they did not have the original graduated tint and the black shaded (dotted) area at the top of the screen was less pronounced and a different shape.
The worst aspect was the pre-glued mirror attachment bracket was in a much lower position, and with the mirror attached, obstructed the view out the front.
Oh, and the little black bordered vin number window in the front left corner was out of position, obscuring the number. Original all the way- if it doesn't break the bank.
The (second) glass man was a star however, perfect fit.
The silkprint is a common one...The worst aspect was the pre-glued mirror attachment bracket was in a much lower position, and with the mirror attached, obstructed the view out the front.
Oh, and the little black bordered vin number window in the front left corner was out of position, obscuring the number. Original all the way- if it doesn't break the bank.
The (second) glass man was a star however, perfect fit.
Aftermarket. Yank the screen down to align the VIN and you have a gap at the top which looks even worse.
Genuine.
Camera was not mounted to a fixed spot so maybe a tad inaccurate on the angle. But the issue was real.
Just checked my policy as I knew they would charge more for an OEM screen
1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp.
Glassman (roughly) what do you think it would cost for an OEM screen for a 2020 X5?
1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp.
Glassman (roughly) what do you think it would cost for an OEM screen for a 2020 X5?
Glassman said:
Without question, there is a difference.
The Original Equipment part is made from a blueprint owned by the car manufacturer. With rare exception, these parts will have the 'stamp' on it which is all part of the silkprint (there's not someone at the end of the production line). We still refer to it as the silkprint but the printing of the black border (the frit) has evolved and is mostly printed digitally.
A windscreen that does not bear the car manufacturer's logo is not as good as or the same as one that does.
In some cases, a firm like Pilkington, Saint Gobain will be the appointed OEM for a model, and they might also produce an aftermarket equivalent to that which, effectively, is a copy. There's nothing official on the matter, but from what I know (and I'd rather not go on record to revealing where this information comes from) the process for producing an aftermarket windscreen (in this context) might be different to how the originals are manufactured. Usually, the font size on the (glass) manufacturer's codes and info printed on the glass will be (unmistakably) different in size or prominence. It might even have been printed slightly to the left, or a bit to the right of where the original one is.
Brands such as Nordglass (originally Polish, but now owned by Asahi Glass Co, Japan) XYG (Xynyi) Safeview, Starglass, Fu Yao, Shatterprufe, Benson, Lamisafe, Lamishield to name a few cater more for the budget end of glass. Even Pilkington (Japanese-owned) compete in this market. The only one that hasn't relinquished its position is Saint Gobain (Sekurit) although I am seeing some changes here and there.
The best available product is the OEM part.
As an aside on the OEM/aftermarket question from the same supplier - I knew someone who was involved in auto electronics who ended up doing some work for Bosch aftermarket. In essence the aftermarket dept were having to reverse engineer the Bosch OEM parts. So it seems that in some businesses at least, the Chinese walls between departments are pretty effective. Admittedly, I would imagine Bosch to be more likely to have distinct business units than a glass manufacturer.The Original Equipment part is made from a blueprint owned by the car manufacturer. With rare exception, these parts will have the 'stamp' on it which is all part of the silkprint (there's not someone at the end of the production line). We still refer to it as the silkprint but the printing of the black border (the frit) has evolved and is mostly printed digitally.
A windscreen that does not bear the car manufacturer's logo is not as good as or the same as one that does.
In some cases, a firm like Pilkington, Saint Gobain will be the appointed OEM for a model, and they might also produce an aftermarket equivalent to that which, effectively, is a copy. There's nothing official on the matter, but from what I know (and I'd rather not go on record to revealing where this information comes from) the process for producing an aftermarket windscreen (in this context) might be different to how the originals are manufactured. Usually, the font size on the (glass) manufacturer's codes and info printed on the glass will be (unmistakably) different in size or prominence. It might even have been printed slightly to the left, or a bit to the right of where the original one is.
Brands such as Nordglass (originally Polish, but now owned by Asahi Glass Co, Japan) XYG (Xynyi) Safeview, Starglass, Fu Yao, Shatterprufe, Benson, Lamisafe, Lamishield to name a few cater more for the budget end of glass. Even Pilkington (Japanese-owned) compete in this market. The only one that hasn't relinquished its position is Saint Gobain (Sekurit) although I am seeing some changes here and there.
The best available product is the OEM part.
I also take the view OEM is best (for almost all car parts), as I don't have the patience to debug idiosyncratic little differences between suppliers or want to risk a reduced lifespan.
Uncle Meat said:
Just checked my policy as I knew they would charge more for an OEM screen
1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp.
That isn't what it means.1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp.
I recently had National do a screen for my Jag. They were the approved repairer for my insurer. Initially I was offered a copy, but discussed it with the guy in the depot. He agreed to get geniune glass in, but told me there would be a short delay (a few days)... as it was over a bank holiday and they were busy, I agreed to book it in a week later when they had a longer working week, plus the glass would be available. I made their life easier, they helped me out. Everyone a winner.
Job done, original Jag glass, no additional charges from the insurer (just my £75 excess).
Uncle Meat said:
Just checked my policy as I knew they would charge more for an OEM screen
1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp and better quality part.
Glassman (roughly) what do you think it would cost for an OEM screen for a 2020 X5?
FTFY. 1,2,6: Standard Excess £0
1,2,6: Voluntary Excess £250
3: Windscreen Repair Excess £25
3: Windscreen Replacement Excess £125
1,2,6: An additional excess of £250 applies in addition to any excess shown if you choose not to use the
insurer’s approved repairer.
So £375 if I want an OEM stamp and better quality part.
Glassman (roughly) what do you think it would cost for an OEM screen for a 2020 X5?
I wouldn't want to estimate without knowing the spec (and checking with BMW UK). Cars with HUD will be the dearest (those windscreens have a 'wedge' piece for the display).
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff