Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 604
So a couple of weeks ago I noticed a windscreen crack - about 1 cm (outside drivers view, so not an MOT fail) but pretty clear it was going to require a replacement, i.e it wasn't just a chip.
My current esure premium was £100, as my insurance was due to change this weekend, I thought I would leave and see what price it would be with new insurance (esure couldn't match my quote elsewhere). It turned out new insurer had a lower excess at £75, for this so I figured I'd get it sorted once I'd changed insurance. I wouldn't be driving with an MoT fail, so why would I pay more for the replacement?
Well, of course my own scrimping didn't work. Last weekend, I notice the crack had got much bigger (over 40mm - so an MoT fail) , so immediately called autoglass to arrange replacement accepting I'd suck up the £25 difference. So far so good, I took the risk, it didn't work, but I've not really lost out. I don't believe I've done anything outside 'the rules'.
Come the day of the appointment yesterday with Autoglass, I wait and wait, they don't turn up because the fitter has 'had to go home for the day'. So now they reschedule, and guess what, they can only come AFTER my insurance policy has changed.
So my question, should I be paying excess against my old or new policy? You can imagine what Autoglass say, I've paid already against the excess of my old policy, it's my old insurer they'll claim with so that's the price I pay. Is this right? If I'd not been driving the car and the crack had just developed and I'd reported next week - would they have asked the date the crack got bigger to confirm which insurer to claim with?
This point aside, the more worrying thing, Autoglass, when I complained that they'd failed to meet an appointment, offered no compensation and told me 'I was fine to drive my car because modern windscreens are laminated so even a big crack isn't a problem'. Really??? How valid is this? It is an MoT fail, can I really drive the car with a crack well in excess of 40mm? My assumption is I could be fined for driving an unsafe vehicle? There seems to be confusion online - you can drive a Vehicle that has failed an MoT inside the expiry date, if it's deemed roadworthy (apparently the government tightened up the wording recently to make it clear its illegal to drive an unroadworthy car). Note the car is less than a year old so isn't due an MoT for a couple of years.
I know I should've sorted earlier, but I feel auto glass have let me down by not turning up when they said they should, and they are given out advice they may lead to drivers using their cars illegally. Just interested to hear peoples thoughts.
My current esure premium was £100, as my insurance was due to change this weekend, I thought I would leave and see what price it would be with new insurance (esure couldn't match my quote elsewhere). It turned out new insurer had a lower excess at £75, for this so I figured I'd get it sorted once I'd changed insurance. I wouldn't be driving with an MoT fail, so why would I pay more for the replacement?
Well, of course my own scrimping didn't work. Last weekend, I notice the crack had got much bigger (over 40mm - so an MoT fail) , so immediately called autoglass to arrange replacement accepting I'd suck up the £25 difference. So far so good, I took the risk, it didn't work, but I've not really lost out. I don't believe I've done anything outside 'the rules'.
Come the day of the appointment yesterday with Autoglass, I wait and wait, they don't turn up because the fitter has 'had to go home for the day'. So now they reschedule, and guess what, they can only come AFTER my insurance policy has changed.
So my question, should I be paying excess against my old or new policy? You can imagine what Autoglass say, I've paid already against the excess of my old policy, it's my old insurer they'll claim with so that's the price I pay. Is this right? If I'd not been driving the car and the crack had just developed and I'd reported next week - would they have asked the date the crack got bigger to confirm which insurer to claim with?
This point aside, the more worrying thing, Autoglass, when I complained that they'd failed to meet an appointment, offered no compensation and told me 'I was fine to drive my car because modern windscreens are laminated so even a big crack isn't a problem'. Really??? How valid is this? It is an MoT fail, can I really drive the car with a crack well in excess of 40mm? My assumption is I could be fined for driving an unsafe vehicle? There seems to be confusion online - you can drive a Vehicle that has failed an MoT inside the expiry date, if it's deemed roadworthy (apparently the government tightened up the wording recently to make it clear its illegal to drive an unroadworthy car). Note the car is less than a year old so isn't due an MoT for a couple of years.
I know I should've sorted earlier, but I feel auto glass have let me down by not turning up when they said they should, and they are given out advice they may lead to drivers using their cars illegally. Just interested to hear peoples thoughts.
Last edited:
