Not upheld: unfair claim settlement terms and windscreen replacement policy complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms W claimed on her motor insurance policy for windscreen replacement and wanted OEM glass, but Admiral offered to use non-OEM glass meeting similar standards for the excess of £115, with an additional £800 charge for OEM glass. Ms W complained that this was unfair and that she could obtain replacement more cheaply herself. The ombudsman found that Admiral's policy terms explicitly permit non-OEM glass of similar standard and quality, do not guarantee like-for-like replacement, and that this is a common and fair term in motor insurance. The approved repairer's glass meets equivalent standards and includes a lifetime guarantee, so Admiral was not obliged to provide OEM glass or a cash-in-lieu option. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman focused on the contractual terms between Ms W and Admiral. The policy explicitly permits use of non-OEM glass of similar standard and quality and does not guarantee like-for-like replacement or return to pre-damage position. This is a common and fair term in motor insurance policies. The approved repairer's glass meets the same standards as the original, is made by a manufacturer supplier, and comes with a lifetime guarantee. Admiral has no obligation to offer a cash-in-lieu alternative or step outside its contractual arrangement with the approved repairer. The ombudsman found no unfairness in Admiral's position.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website