Not upheld: defective service / product quality - windscreen replacement and HUD distortion complaint against Intact Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

K made a claim on their motor trade insurance policy for a windscreen replacement completed on 14 February 2025. After the replacement, a HUD distortion issue was reported on 3 March 2025. Intact replaced the windscreen twice more but the issue persisted. A main dealer inspection confirmed HUD damage requiring replacement but did not establish causation with the windscreen installation. A diagnostic pre-scan report from 14 February 2025 showed an electrical fault in the HUD control module existed prior to the windscreen replacement. The ombudsman found the glass met policy terms and the HUD damage was not caused by Intact's glass partner, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman was persuaded by the diagnostic pre-scan report showing an electrical fault (U3000 error) in the HUD control module prior to the windscreen replacement on 14 February 2025. Although Mr S claimed the distortion did not exist before the replacement, there was no professional evidence to contest the pre-scan report. The main dealer report, while confirming HUD damage, did not establish causation between the windscreen installation and the HUD imperfections. The glass supplied met the policy terms regarding specification and sourcing. Therefore, the ombudsman could not fairly hold Intact responsible for the HUD damage or require reimbursement for the dealer report or compensation for inconvenience.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website