The main reason I didn’t upgrade to Monzo Premium

Some people might not agree, but when you do an insurance claim, I personally feel like it should be replaced with a brand-new device.
The fact that this is replaced with the refurbishment is one of the main reason that put me off going onto Monzo Premium.

I’m curious what others think about this.

It’s common. Apple don’t give you a brand new device with AppleCare.


No insurer I know of will do new for old.


Agree or not, that is pretty standard. Monzo isn’t the odd one out here.


I’ve claimed phones on various policies over the years, always been a refurb device

1 Like

For once I’m with Monzo on this. No insurance that I’m aware of offers this. Even Apple use referbs I believe.


So there are some who do. And the policy highlights what those are. They are new for old policies, and although uncommon they do exist. It’s usually just on general contents insurance though. Urban Jungle is one I know whose policy is new for old.

Apple does give you refurbs too, but not always. But with Apple refurbs you have some guarantees. It renews your warranty, Apple stand by it, and have very stringent QA on refurbs, they will only ever use genuine Apple parts. You get none of that with standard mobile insurance that is not a new for old policy.

The problem with not new-for-old policies is that the insurer can determine your device/item’s value based on factors like how long you’ve owned it, and wear and tear, and the condition it was in. They will reach a point where the insurer will decide it’s worth £0 and not pay out. Or that it’s worth less than a repair/replacement and dent your claim. It’s a common wriggle-out opportunity for them.


The policy is standard.

Funnily enough when I had Monzo Premium they gave me the cost of a new device, but only because they lost the device after it was sent to them and didn’t have an equivalent spec phone in their stock.

1 Like

I’m sure they do but as you say a lot will find “reasons” not to give you like for like.

But interesting to have a few examples as they were ones I’d not heard of.

1 Like

Have you found any insurance that does this?

Typically it is like-for-like, or amortised value.

For example car insurance claim for a totalled car does not give you a brand new fiesta, but approximate value of your particular fiesta age & mileage which should be enough to buy a similar used fiesta.

The instances when a brand-new device was received were actually warranty claims from a mass recall, not insurance.

1 Like

That bit is the important bit that should have been at the start of your post.

Illuminating. But why?

I wanted to expand on the fact that new for old insurance policies are actually a thing that exist, and why folks might prefer them, because I wasn’t sure if people didn’t understand that from some of the replies.

Every single other post above mine already covered the fact that it’s not a common feature of mobile insurance, so it wasn’t the point of my post, and therefore the least important part. It was only added to the end for clarity. If I knew it would just give you something else to snipe at me for, I wouldn’t have included the clarification at all.

Because the context was about mobile phones.

Your post has been edited now but I was not sniping… sigh… just pointing out that the important bit was at the end but you received it poorly and this is why I cant feedback you. It didnt contest your contents, just the ordering.

So back to the op, I do know some home insurers have (or had) new for old policies such as direct line which used to have an advert years ago promoting the fact although I dont know if they still do and I fully expect a mobile carve out if they still do.
Mobile insurance polices though, that I have seen, all do refurbs as the default but the refurbs can be of varying quality where as at least apple care is a lot easier to deal with.

It comes at the trail end of a long string of back to back snipes and jabs of my opinions from you, and I’m fed up of them, so you’ll forgive me if I’ve misconstrued your intent here. It read the same.

Your feedback is noted, but the part you picked out as being most important in my post, wasn’t at all relevant nor important to what my post was about, so I’ve taken it out.

There’s a big distinction between refurbished with OEM parts and with non-OEM parts. Whilst many services offer refurb for old, they’re at least OEM parts.

This summer, I replaced my iPhone screen using Monzo premium. Though, this was a tortuous affair. Not only was the service inconvenient (where to not have your phone absent for multiple days there was only one place in London you could go to, which required setting aside a whole day for) they replaced both my battery and screen with non OEM parts.

Whilst any non-Apple replacement of an iPhone screen will mean you lose minor things like TrueTone—the Non-OEM screens are terrible. For example: much more scratchable, registering touches when in pocket causing my phone to lock up, a terrible olephobic coating, the screen randomly flashing on unlocking and isn’t installed flush (despite going back twice due to issues). To make matters worse, the durability is terrible and I’ve smashed the screen TWICE now. I’ve never had a case or smashed a phone ever before.

The Assurant T&Cs say that the refurbished parts are equivalent, but in my view these are far from equivalent. Alas, Assurant didn’t recognise this when complaining.

I’ve downgraded to Monzo plus and will be going with AppleCare to spare myself from this in the future as it’s not worth your time. Such a shame as I love the other bits of premium, but it’s just not worth it.

1 Like

They just need a better partner who will let you take it to Apple, and/or source your own repair/replacement and reimburse you the cost. There are plenty of insurers out there who will let you do that, and they’re typically cheaper than Apple Care too, if you don’t care about the other benefits you get from Apple Care.

1 Like

Not on phones, certainly.