Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


BDFL - Memuneh
61185 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11968

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

Topic # 237833 20-Jun-2018 09:20
Send private message quote this post

Received this today - while I don't usually post op-ed pieces (press releases are ok), this is an interesting take so decided to post it here for discussion:

 

 

The increasing cost of replacing the modern technology embedded in new car windscreens will mean many consumers will no longer receive free vehicle glass cover under their insurance policy according to an industry expert.

 

Jo Mason CEO of NZbrokers, one of the country's largest insurance brokerage groups, says the change means owners of older vehicles will lose their free glass cover - even though the impact on insurers is due to the cost of repairing technology is only found in the newest models.

 

“Some new vehicle windscreens can contain a wide range of sophisticated technology including cameras, radar, rain sensors, heating elements, light sensors, UV protective cover and even acoustic lamination - which can be expensive to replace.

 

“We have seen one example of an insurance claim for a new car replacement windscreen a costing upwards of $15,000.

 

“While we have seen extreme cases where windscreen repair claims can reach this level, it is rare as they are typically in the very latest models and vehicles retailing at more than $100,000.

 

“Putting this in perspective, the average age of the four million vehicles in New Zealand’s fleet is over 14 years - and you can pick up a standard windscreen for an older model for under $200,” she says.

 

Mason says that insurers are now seeing the likelihood of higher cost across their portfolio and are moving to change their policy conditions.

 

“Free glass cover has been a standard feature of most vehicle insurance policies in New Zealand for decades.

 

“Although some of this technology is just coming on to the market now, we’ve already had one insurer say they will no longer provide free glass cover as a result of the higher cost of replacing windscreens,”

 

“Our concern with this change is that for the vast majority of vehicles on the road, the cost to replace their windscreen is just a few hundred dollars, but the policy change should not penalise the owners of older vehicles who do not have the latest technology.

 

“Unfortunately the change by one insurer will mean that for all motorists regardless of the age of their vehicle, they are likely to lose the benefit of a replacement windscreen with no excess at some stage in the future, if not already,”

 

“Left unchecked, we believe this trend could become commonplace among all insurers which would be inherently unfair to most Kiwis and could be better managed by premium or excess increases for just those cars with modern technology,” she says.

 

Mason says the change is likely to impact many motorists when they go to renew their vehicle insurance and they should check with their insurance broker to ensure they are adequately covered in the event of vehicle glass replacement.

 

“While we haven't seen this change implemented across all insurers yet, we believe it is inevitable that a maximum limit will be placed on the amount of windscreen cover unless consumer response to the potential change sees them look for alternative solutions.

 

“Consumers need to make sure they speak to their broker and read the policy fine print when they next renew their insurance and consider shopping around for the best coverage package that suits them,” she says.

 





View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
3006 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1152

Subscriber

  Reply # 2040889 20-Jun-2018 09:45
4 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Insurance companies are probably just too lazy to accurately categorize every different car based on windscreen replacement cost.

The sooner AI shakes up the insurance industry, the better.





4952 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2010


  Reply # 2041057 20-Jun-2018 13:58
Send private message quote this post

If this happens I will buy a policy extension on the Mazda (sensors etc), but not the Pajero (no sensors).

 

I bet premiums don't come down when 'free' glass cover (which isn't free at all, but built into the base premium) is removed.





Mike

Meow
7786 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3844

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2041063 20-Jun-2018 14:13
Send private message quote this post

I'm with Vero (via ANZ) and this is the first I have heard of it. I just checked and my policy still includes glass.

 

If I get a letter I'll be questioning them about it...





136 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 31


  Reply # 2041110 20-Jun-2018 14:38
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Why don't they just continue to offer zero excess windscreen cover but put a price cap on it, e.g. $300 or whatever?


gzt

10120 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1539


  Reply # 2041111 20-Jun-2018 14:41
Send private message quote this post

In the meantime - insurance company win! these are not the luxury vehicle screens you are looking for (handwave)..ca-ching..

1350 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 211


  Reply # 2041113 20-Jun-2018 14:49
Send private message quote this post

Does this mean windscreen is a separate policy to car insurance?

Or is it end of no excess on windows, which they charge an extra fee for anyway.

Edit: saw maximum limit, so maybe people with normal wind screens have. Nothing to worry about.

4952 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2010


  Reply # 2041217 20-Jun-2018 16:03
Send private message quote this post

CitizenErased:

 

Why don't they just continue to offer zero excess windscreen cover but put a price cap on it, e.g. $300 or whatever?

 

 

Because there's an opportunity to reduce their risk, without reducing premiums.





Mike

11831 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3836

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2041225 20-Jun-2018 16:28
Send private message quote this post

Given that it is the highways authority and local councils who glibly throw stones all over the road instead of using proper hot roll tarmac, ought they not to be the ones being penalised rather than the hapless motorist obliged to suffer damaged glass and paint as a result?





1439 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Subscriber

  Reply # 2041236 20-Jun-2018 16:57
Send private message quote this post

Geektastic: Given that it is the highways authority and local councils who glibly throw stones all over the road instead of using proper hot roll tarmac, ought they not to be the ones being penalised rather than the hapless motorist obliged to suffer damaged glass and paint as a result?

 

Asphalt costs ~4x more than chipseal in Auckland, and trust me its not cheap.  We are a captive market in NZ with only a few coating plants across NZ and this is controlled by the major surfacing contractors.  If we could asphalt all of Auckland we would, but the cost would be astronomical let alone dealing with the scarcity of high quality M/4 class aggregate for our arterial and high speed road network.

 

Its an issue of being at the arse end of the supply chain and having predominately marine based aggregates that polish off quickly!


14273 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1848


  Reply # 2041269 20-Jun-2018 18:00
Send private message quote this post

I was listening to them discussing this on RNZ. From what I gathered from that, they are doing this due to some windscreen replacements now costing 15,000, due to the sensors on the windscreen. But many cars have had sensors for literally decades. My old european car had windscreen wiper and light sensors on the windscreen back in 2000. Although they were a bit unclear with the answer, it also sounds like a windscreen claim could affect your no claims bonus, which if that is the case, that would be a gamechanger. It would mean that driving on chip or unsealed roads could be a very expensive excercise. I know someone who chipped their windscreen almost every week when driving on Wairarapa roads.


14273 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1848


  Reply # 2041271 20-Jun-2018 18:02
Send private message quote this post

Benoire:

 

Geektastic: Given that it is the highways authority and local councils who glibly throw stones all over the road instead of using proper hot roll tarmac, ought they not to be the ones being penalised rather than the hapless motorist obliged to suffer damaged glass and paint as a result?

 

Asphalt costs ~4x more than chipseal in Auckland, and trust me its not cheap.  We are a captive market in NZ with only a few coating plants across NZ and this is controlled by the major surfacing contractors.  If we could asphalt all of Auckland we would, but the cost would be astronomical let alone dealing with the scarcity of high quality M/4 class aggregate for our arterial and high speed road network.

 

Its an issue of being at the arse end of the supply chain and having predominately marine based aggregates that polish off quickly!

 

 

 

 

It is similar with the building materials market. Unfortionately the governments don't seem to want to address this, to make things cheaper for NZs.


3006 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1152

Subscriber

  Reply # 2041293 20-Jun-2018 18:33
Send private message quote this post

Benoire:

Geektastic: Given that it is the highways authority and local councils who glibly throw stones all over the road instead of using proper hot roll tarmac, ought they not to be the ones being penalised rather than the hapless motorist obliged to suffer damaged glass and paint as a result?


Asphalt costs ~4x more than chipseal in Auckland, and trust me its not cheap.  We are a captive market in NZ with only a few coating plants across NZ and this is controlled by the major surfacing contractors.  If we could asphalt all of Auckland we would, but the cost would be astronomical let alone dealing with the scarcity of high quality M/4 class aggregate for our arterial and high speed road network.


Its an issue of being at the arse end of the supply chain and having predominately marine based aggregates that polish off quickly!



I get that asphalt is more expensive, but it is also safer. In that the tar doesn't bleed to the surface in summer. And then you end up with a completely smooth surface, which is extremely slippery in wet weather. The road directly outside my house is like that.

SH1 in Dome Valley north of Auckland has chip seal with the bleed through problem. Yet there are lots of signs saying that that road has a high crash rate. It is crazy that it hasn't been resealed with hotmix.

Also since it lasts longer, there is also a saving on not having to pay for lots of workers to do traffic management as part of the job. As often as what would otherwise be required. Since Labour costs tend to increase faster than material costs. Whatever cost saving from using chip seal Vs hotmix, won't be anywhere near as large as it used to be. Especially on roads that have a lot of traffic.





14273 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1848


  Reply # 2041299 20-Jun-2018 19:04
Send private message quote this post

Aredwood:

SH1 in Dome Valley north of Auckland has chip seal with the bleed through problem. Yet there are lots of signs saying that that road has a high crash rate. It is crazy that it hasn't been resealed with hotmix.

 

In the Wairarapa I have noticed they use chip a lot, including SH2. Last time I got a chipped windscreen it was around Carterton, which has only recently had it resurfaced again in chip. It does however seem to take them a lot longer to install tarseal compared to chip. Also I noticed with asphalt ,some councils are now only asphalt the part of the road that gets driven on and is more worn, so the middle and sides are left as an older surface, and the contractors have to cut it. So some roads end up being a mixture of chip and asphalt, and it doesn't look great either . I imagine that is also for cost savings, but it takes so much longer for them to do it as well, so more inconvenience for drivers, and probably costs more in lost productivity for the area. I imagine that if the join isn't good and level, there is the risk of issues for cyclists.

 

I think if insurance companies all decide to do this, people are going to demand better road surfaces. Or maybe we should be demanding that car manufacturers make windscreens cheaper to replace or more durable, and whether these sensors need to go into the actual windscreen.


11831 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3836

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2041300 20-Jun-2018 19:08
Send private message quote this post

Aredwood:
Benoire:

Geektastic: Given that it is the highways authority and local councils who glibly throw stones all over the road instead of using proper hot roll tarmac, ought they not to be the ones being penalised rather than the hapless motorist obliged to suffer damaged glass and paint as a result?


Asphalt costs ~4x more than chipseal in Auckland, and trust me its not cheap.  We are a captive market in NZ with only a few coating plants across NZ and this is controlled by the major surfacing contractors.  If we could asphalt all of Auckland we would, but the cost would be astronomical let alone dealing with the scarcity of high quality M/4 class aggregate for our arterial and high speed road network.


Its an issue of being at the arse end of the supply chain and having predominately marine based aggregates that polish off quickly!



I get that asphalt is more expensive, but it is also safer. In that the tar doesn't bleed to the surface in summer. And then you end up with a completely smooth surface, which is extremely slippery in wet weather. The road directly outside my house is like that.

SH1 in Dome Valley north of Auckland has chip seal with the bleed through problem. Yet there are lots of signs saying that that road has a high crash rate. It is crazy that it hasn't been resealed with hotmix.

Also since it lasts longer, there is also a saving on not having to pay for lots of workers to do traffic management as part of the job. As often as what would otherwise be required. Since Labour costs tend to increase faster than material costs. Whatever cost saving from using chip seal Vs hotmix, won't be anywhere near as large as it used to be. Especially on roads that have a lot of traffic.


The cost isn't relevant to the point. It's not the car driver's choice what the roads are made of. Thus it seems rather unfair that the driver bears the burden of a choice made by the government.





14273 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1848


  Reply # 2041301 20-Jun-2018 19:12
Send private message quote this post

Geektastic: The cost isn't relevant to the point. It's not the car driver's choice what the roads are made of. Thus it seems rather unfair that the driver bears the burden of a choice made by the government.

 

 

 

Councils too, as local councils I believe are responsible for the upkeep of local roads, and it seems many local roads are chip.


 1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.