Mitsubishi First vs insurance providers

Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV Forum

Help Support Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

NightPHEVer

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Messages
303
Location
Forres, Scotland, UK. 2014 GX4h with clear rear li
I have mentioned this phenomenon before but, does anybody know of any UK insurance provider which is totally on board and in agreement with Mitsubishi First when it comes to agreeing to use genuine Mitsubishi parts and main dealer repair facilities? I ask this as I'll have to renew my insurance soon and my current insurer - a well known insurance provider who regularly advertise on TV, possibly with a nautical theme - definitely don't agree with Mitsubishi on this point.

When I recently phoned a Mercedes Benz main dealership the message that was played while I was waiting was promoting precisely the same service (obviously MB's version not Mitsubishi) ie. contact MB first not your insurance provider. I'm still not entirely clear if the very act of doing this wouldn't in fact endanger the contract you already have with your insurance provider - ie. contact them immediately in any circumstances that might involve a claim by you or anybody else regarding your insurance policy.

Here's my earlier message that was originally on the 'My car hit while parked' post:

"If for any reason anybody in the UK feels the urge to contact 'Mitsubishi First' (or MAP the same thing?) regarding any insurance claim I strongly recommend that you enquire of Mitsubishi First, very carefully, that your particular insurance provider is fully ‘on board’ and are totally in agreement with Mitsubishi First in all respects, when it comes to any repair claim. Quite how you'd know whether this is the case or not before the event I’m none too sure. A read of your insurers policy guide will clarify that likelyhood. Maybe enquire of your insurer whether or not they recognise the phenomenon that is Mitsubish First when you take out the policy? If you read the promotional material from Mitsubishi First you’ll see what I mean regarding the idea that you contact them and not your insurer - which may or may not be a good idea, in my experience I’m really not sure. I’m no lawyer but presumably your legal agreement is with your insurer, to whom you have paid money.

In fact I would recommend that you read your insurer's policy guide very carefully (be prepared for a few surprises perhaps!) if you imagine that using genuine Mitsubishi parts and an approved Mitsubishi repair shop, is a realistic possibility. Based on recent experience of a windscreen claim, all I can say is that your insurance provider might not agree. Mitsubishi First made a bit of a mistake with my enquiry and subsequent claim, but did rectify their mistake to my complete satisaction. This ‘mistake' did cost them a bit though. I do now have a genuine Mitsubishi replacement windscreen with genuine Mitsubishi seals and clips, fitted at a Mitsubishi dealer (£833 inc vat!). But my insurance company were not at all willing to pay for it.

This unwillingness on the part of some insurers to use genuine manufacturers' parts and repair shops may explain why certain insurance policies are a lot cheaper than others. Maybe you are ‘within your rights to request’ but I’m not sure whether the insurance provider has to take any notice of that request. It would seem that there could well be some ongoing disagreement between car manufacturers (not just Mitsubishi) and insurance providers when it comes to the use of genuine manufacturers' parts and repairs".
 
NightPHEVer said:
I have mentioned this phenomenon before but, does anybody know of any UK insurance provider which is totally on board and in agreement with Mitsubishi First when it comes to agreeing to use genuine Mitsubishi parts and main dealer repair facilities? I ask this as I'll have to renew my insurance soon and my current insurer - a well known insurance provider who regularly advertise on TV, possibly with a nautical theme - definitely don't agree with Mitsubishi on this point.

Unsurprisingly, Mitsubishi’s own Insurance Company guarantees to use genuine Mitsubishi spare parts and Mitsubishi approved repair facilities. Their premiums will almost certainly be more expensive than your nautical themed insurer. However, in my experience you get what you pay for.

For over ten years my son has had numerous cars insured with a nautically named company that specialises in multi car policies. He recently had a Range Rover stolen. It was recovered within 24hrs having sustained some damage. The aforementioned Insurance company are resisting settling the damage repair claim on the grounds that the car has non-standard bumpers fitted even though these bumpers have no effect on car performance and are undamaged.
 
I presume in that case that your son did not declair the modification when taking out the insurance.
He is lucky that his insurance was not deemed invalid due to misinformation as every insurance policy states.
He has been driving with potentially invalid insurance.
 
In my experience, in the event of a claim, insurance providers do seem to like look very hard indeed at anything that they might be able to interpret as any sort of misrepresentation, even though it seemingly has no relevance whatsoever to the claim. It makes you wonder at any one time how many policies are actually - as far as the insurance provider is concerned - invalid, because 'modifications' however small or seemingly irrelevant have been made without informing the them. The fitting of winter tyres for instance - actually a costly addition that makes the vehicle safer to use in the winter - but not the case if you were to leave them fitted into the summer. Although summer tyres aren't as safe as winter tyres in the winter, but the insurer doesn't want to know about that!

I suspect the insurance industry also relies on the fact that all insurance is a 'grudge' purchase so customers expect to pay as little as possible without thinking too much about the possible consequences. As you say - like with pretty much everything else in life - there's no reason why you won't be getting what you pay for.

The unwillingness of insurance providers to have anything to do with car manufacturers wanting them to use genuine parts and repairers, seems to me, to be quite a big issue that nobody seems to have noticed - unless they find themselves in the unfortunate position of having to make a claim. I've read in various places about the policyholder being ‘within your rights to request’ genuine parts and repairs, but presumably when your insurer says "not interested - read your policy guide" (which of course you did before you paid for the policy) your only option then would be to take legal advice.
 
I often wonder whether some of the heavily modified "cruisers" cars I see are actually insured! I wonder if they give a long list of all the modifications they've done to their insurers?
 
Regulo said:
I often wonder whether some of the heavily modified "cruisers" cars I see are actually insured! I wonder if they give a long list of all the modifications they've done to their insurers?

Yes some do (well if they've got any sense they do, otherwise they're definitely not insured) - usually with specialist insurers, sometimes with 'agreed valuation' which has to be done by a specialist valuer every year and sometimes with limited mileage, and I would hope garaged at night. Some of them will be paying very high premiums though.

I once owned a Sierra XR4i to which I fitted a Sierra Cosworth steering wheel (which cost £100) and had to pay extra on my premium as the insurer considered somebody may steal the car just to steal the steering wheel. Actually there were at least two attempts to steal the car, although I don't remember telling my insurer that at the time.
 
Regulo said:
Wonder if fitting LED bulbs instead of the 2 candlepower originals would invalidate my insurance? :?:
I recommend mentioning it to your insurer. It probably won't change the premium. I've got a minor (trivial) medical condition, but I always mention it when applying for holiday cover - it has never cost me anything (so far), but you don't want to be having an argument if you suffer a medical emergency abroad. The legal basis for insurance in the UK is "uberrima fides" - utmost good faith (supposed to be on both sides!)
 
In my experience just the simple act of talking to your insurer puts your premium up!

In addition I consider that insurers are very poor 'gamblers'. They readily take on the risk in return for your cash but then fight to the end in order to renege on the deal. Not to be trusted IMHO.

Having said that I had to claim this year for the first time in nearly 50 years driving. :( ...I await the renewal premium which I know will increase and also the impact on my wife's and my other car's premiums. Had the 'self inflicted' damage been less then I would have sought used parts and repaired it myself. However I still reckon that the increase to all 3 insurance premiums will be less than the cost of the damage repair. Interestingly the insurer will not tell me the cost of the claim but they expect me to own up and advise the cost for new quotes.
 
"Had the 'self inflicted' damage been less then I would have sought used parts and repaired it myself."

But of course yet again, had you wanted to repair it yourself, you are still supposed to tell your insurer that there has been some sort of 'incident' even if you don't make a claim. Not sure how informing them would affect your premium though. Maybe the very fact that you've been involved in some sort of incident would be enough for them to consider that you are a future liability?

My sister-in-law was involved in a minor collision that wasn't her fault and the damage to her already semi-knackered 15 year old Discovery was of no consequence to her so she didn't claim against the person responsible. A few months later though she got a call from her insurer asking why she hadn't informed them at the time that she'd been involved in a collision. They got her reg. number from the person who actually caused the collision and was claiming for his own vehicle on his own insurance. Her insurer then refused to continue her policy and said it had in fact been invalid since the collision as she hadn't informed them!

And don't even get me on to the subject of what happens if a cyclist damages your car, or in fact their own bicycle as a result of colliding with your car...
 
My 'self inflicted' damage was reversing into a stone wall on a narrow country lane. Can't see why I should tell them if I had chosen to repair it myself.
 
Tipper said:
In my experience just the simple act of talking to your insurer puts your premium up!

I used to be that cynical but to be fair it was not my experience with Direct Line. I told them about winter tyres on a SAAB 95 Aero and they said no change in Premium. I then put oversize disc brakes and Brembo pads on a LR Disco 3, again no change. I then talked to them about remapping the Disco 3. They said “0 to 10% increase in BHP no charge, + 10% to + 20% BHP increased Premium by £23 per year. Increase BHP by over 20% and we won’t insure you”

All of which seemed fair, reasonable and pragmatic to me. Mind you I have no experience of how well they react to claims. I know they do not guarantee to use genuine manufacturer’s parts for all repairs which is the reason I didn’t insure my PHEV with them.
 
I'd still like to know which insurance providers (apart from presumably Mitsubishi themselves) if there are any, actually do cheerfully embrace the prospect of genuine parts and repair facilities. Looks as though neither Direct Line or Admiral do.

I've just had a somewhat protracted online 'chat' conversation with Admiral regarding my use of winter tyres (fitted to a second set of OEM alloy wheels). Got there in the end (bit of an English language barrier situation), settled for a 'note on my policy' at no extra charge, although I have a transcript of the 'chat' just in case. I don't think the person I conversed with actually knew what winter tyres are. I had to cut 'n' paste a quote from Admirals' own website to illustrate their policy on winter tyres. :roll: I (sort of) prefer the online 'chat' method vs. phone though because at least I have written evidence of what was said, and I didn't have to listen to any soft-rock muzak while I was waiting.
 
NightPHEVer said:
I've just had a somewhat protracted online 'chat' conversation with Admiral regarding my use of winter tyres (fitted to a second set of OEM alloy wheels). Got there in the end (bit of an English language barrier situation), settled for a 'note on my policy' at no extra charge, although I have a transcript of the 'chat' just in case. I don't think the person I conversed with actually knew what winter tyres are. I had to cut 'n' paste a quote from Admirals' own website to illustrate their policy on winter tyres. :roll: I (sort of) prefer the online 'chat' method vs. phone though because at least I have written evidence of what was said, and I didn't have to listen to any soft-rock muzak while I was waiting.

This has come up before - as confirmed on this link from ABI https://www.abi.org.uk/products-and-issues/choosing-the-right-insurance/motor-insurance/winter-tyres/ (updated 16/10/17), there seem to be no insurers who charge extra or apply terms for using winter tyres and only a few want you to waste their time by requiring notification - including Admiral. Even those who do probably only want the excuse to try selling you something. :lol:

I would be happy to rely on this info in any dispute.
 
I've just renewed my PHEV insurance, decided to go with Mitsubishi because they are the only provider I was able to find that will use genuine parts and repair shops. Mitsubishi insurance is connected with Original Insurance Services Ltd who seem to specialise in providing OEM insurance policies for various manufacturers. Clearly a bit of an alternative insurance 'business idea' up against the usual crop of existing well know and well publicised providers who will not offer this option.

So what's the catch then? Well not surprisingly it's the price! I could have renewed with many of the well known providers for around £320 (fully comp, £250 total excess, business and pleasure use, one named driver) but had to stump up £465 for Mitsubishi, with a whopping £500 excess. Mitsubishi Insurance also assured me that if I get dinged by another driver, it's the other driver's fault and their insurance has to pay, Mitsubishi will also ensure that repairs are done with OEM parts and providers. This would almost certainly not be the case with any other insurance provider.
 
Apart from minor body parts, any serious damage - which would be worth more than your excess - would have to be done by a Mitsu dealer anyway and normal "metal benders" wouldn't risk working on an EV - so you would get OEM parts anyway :idea:
 
Probably the case at this moment in time, but presumably as EV's become more common place bodyshops are going to have to find out how to safely cope with them. And also with time pattern body panels will become available.

There have been several reports on this forum in the past of shonky workmanship, and repairs having to be re-done, via insurance provider 'approved' body shops. I wouldn't want the hassle or the possible future consequences of any repairs needing to be re-done as I actually own and have paid for my PHEV and intend to keep it forever, assuming it doesn't expire before then. I wonder if Mitsubishi have engineered a self-destruct mode into the software where eventually everything starts to fail and gradually shut down, like a knackered old spaceship.

I don't half look after my cars. I'm hoping my 'classic' first generation PHEV will become a collector's item and eventually be worth more than I paid for it. It's still only done 12000 miles from new. I really believe it's an iconic piece of vernacular motoring history.

Does it sound at all that I'm still trying to persuade myself that £465 with a £500 excess was a good idea?
 
Back
Top