We had a recent overnight powercut, after which our 2009 iMac wouldn't power back on.
AA have an "Old for new" replacement policy, but they deemed that Apple technology had moved on too far for our iMac to qualify for this, so initially offered a replacement value, based on what they found on TradeMe for similarly specced models.
But I pushed back, saying that we had a mid-range iMac, which had some performance upgrades upon purchase (faster CPU & 7200RPM HDD). I detailed the specs between our iMac and the current entry level iMac. There were some performance pluses & minuses for both, so I thought it was reasonable to state a case that they are similar enough in performance.
And their policy statesIf something you own is stolen, lost or damaged beyond repair, we’ll replace it with a brand new one, regardless of the age of the original. So if your five year-old TV is stolen, we’ll replace it with a brand new TV equivalent to your original.
I wasn't sure if I would succeed in this, but it felt like a fair enough question to ask them. After a day of deliberation, they got back to me and said they will be replacing it with a new entry level iMac. Within minutes of this decision, I had a call from JB HiFi, who are shipping one out to me (as our local store has no stock).
A very satisfying outcome all round. In fact, in the few times we've had to claim on our AA insurance, they've always been a pleasure to deal with.
I dunno, it seems to me that you had to argue the point to get the outcome that should have been offered in the first place. "...we’ll replace it with a brand new one, regardless of the age of the original" seems pretty unambiguous to me.
And if there is fine print in the policy saying they can, at their discretion, decide that particular items don't qualify then that is pretty misleading to call it an "old for new" policy.
It's great you got the outcome you did, but can you really say they "went above and beyond" when you had to "push back" just to get what your policy entitles you to?