I believe that insurers appreciate it when you do that. I once spoke to someone at Directline who deals with accident management companies when Directline is the third-party insurer and it’s fair to say that they rightly didn’t like the tactics accident management companies employ.
They also take a dim view when the insured party talks up the need for a particular hire car for no reason other than because they can, they want to milk the situation, or they are just plan right up themselves, and I’m inclined to agree. Unless there’s a case of need, unnecessarily increasing cost isn’t cool.
The insured party often thinks that the insurance companies can afford and it’s what we pay premiums for, but of course the insurance company just pass on increasing costs in the form of increased premiums so it’s all of us who pay, not the insurance company.
That person suggested that when they see accident management firms supplying “upgraded” cars then they look closely, and when they see that the customer has requested it - usually highlighted by a changed of car - then they tend to see it as a step too far and might argue that it’s not justified.
Hence my comment that not asking for a trim line equivalent to AMG Executive line would be a good move. If I remember right there’s something in the terms & conditions of our policies which require us to minimise the insurer’s liability which as a general principle is the right one IMHO.
I’m a little extreme in this regard. I had a car stolen and the insurance company delivered a hire car. It was an Audi A6 Avant 3.0 [313] BiTDi Quattro Sport Line Black Edition
and the hire car was a FIAT 500. I took it back as it was cost the insurer didn’t need to bear - I could make do with my wife’s car.
I had told the insurer this when I made the claim but they sent it anyway. When the hire car company saw me bring the car back they assumed I was talking it back because I wanted something posher - they said that’s what most people they supply cars to on behalf insurance companies do!