Not upheld: windscreen claim settlement - non-OEM parts complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B claimed for windscreen damage under his car insurance policy with Admiral. Admiral arranged a replacement using non-OEM glass, which Mr B only discovered at the appointment and objected to, requesting either an OEM replacement or £960 compensation. Admiral declined, citing the policy terms permitting non-OEM glass of similar quality. The ombudsman found Admiral had clearly communicated these terms when Mr B purchased the policy and that evidence supported the non-OEM glass was certified to equivalent quality standards with a lifetime warranty, making the offer fair and reasonable.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Admiral's policy clearly permitted the use of non-OEM glass of similar quality and that Admiral had adequately directed Mr B to these terms when he purchased the policy. The ombudsman was satisfied by Admiral's evidence that the non-OEM glass was certified to the same quality and specification as OEM parts, with the same manufacturers supplying both. The minor visual difference in wiring observed by Mr B did not demonstrate the replacement was inferior or unfair. The ombudsman distinguished Mr B's case from a FOS example involving subsidence repairs, as there was no evidence that non-OEM glass represented an inferior repair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website