The UK Franchise Growth Index

Mobile Windscreens

Automotive · Mobile Automotive · Mobile Windscreen Repair

Mobile Windscreens is associated in published corporate records with the UK vehicle glass repair and replacement industry. National Windscreens' history dates the underlying business to 1971, while Mobile Windscreens Limited was incorporated in 1978. Those are distinct historical measures and should not be used interchangeably as a legal formation date.

More about Mobile Windscreens.

Cary Group's published prospectus records the acquisition of Mobile Windscreens in August 2018. At that time the business operated workshops and mobile units in southern England, with wider reach through the National Windscreens consortium. The prospectus explicitly explains that Mobile Windscreens was not the customer-facing brand, as consortium members traded under National Windscreens.

The documented service model combined fitting centres with mobile vehicle glass work. Published group accounts describe repair and replacement activities through Mobile Windscreens and related companies. Workshop totals, technician vehicles and consortium coverage are different operating measures and do not establish the existence of independently owned franchise territories.

Subsequent National Windscreens material describes acquisitions and integration involving Mobile Windscreens and the Charles Pugh business, followed by restructuring into Cary UK. Companies House currently records Mobile Windscreens Limited as in liquidation. That is the status of the named company and should not be interpreted without further evidence as the closure of all services, brands or assets historically associated with it.

The website recorded in this index leads to Plusnet's broadband business and does not substantiate a vehicle glass franchise offer. The sources reviewed support the history of a corporate vehicle glass operation within a wider group and consortium, but do not verify a current Mobile Windscreens franchise recruitment package. No franchise fee, training entitlement or open territory is therefore asserted.

At a glance

Mobile Windscreens at a glance.

Industry: Automotive
Franchise category: Mobile Automotive
Sub industry: Mobile Windscreen Repair
Founded: 1971
BFA member: No
UK origin: Yes
Recruitment status: Inactive

Investment

Franchise investment.

Management franchise: Yes
Mobile: Yes
Executive franchise: Yes

Visit the website

Investment figures change. Confirm current requirements directly with the franchise network before making any decision.

Five Fibre assessment

How the foundations score.

Every franchise network is assessed across the five connected areas Twine Growth believes support sustainable franchise growth.

How the Five Fibre score is calculated

01 Assess Critical Gap0/20

Assess: The underlying vehicle-glass history is identifiable, but a current Mobile Windscreens franchise business cannot be verified. Corporate trading history and the continuity of related services are not evidence of a transferable franchise proposition.

Profitable core business: No public verification, 0/5. The historical glass operation is evidenced, but no current franchise core business with attributable owner economics is verified. A group’s revenue or service longevity cannot answer whether this named franchise has a profitable transferable model.

Operates for 30 days without daily founder input: No public verification, 0/5. The founder’s documented corporate exit demonstrates a change in business ownership, not a current franchise system operating independently for 30 days. The identity and responsibilities of a present franchisor have not been established.

Ideal franchise owner defined: No public verification, 0/3. No attributable current franchise-owner profile was located. Technician vacancies and general automotive experience requirements describe employment needs, not the selection standards for purchasing an independent territory.

Realistic owner money: No public verification, 0/4. No verified current franchise fee, working-capital requirement, recurring charge or owner-income model was found. Values from other windscreen franchises would create a false investment proposition for this row.

Different opportunity: No public verification, 0/3. The historical service has recognisable features, but a differentiated purchasable franchise opportunity is not substantiated. Mobile repair convenience alone cannot establish that an ownership package exists under this name.

02 Build Critical Gap0/20

Build: Group procedures and technician development cannot be assigned to an unidentified franchise package. The assessment therefore records no verified franchise operating system rather than claiming the associated service businesses have no effective procedures.

Documented operating playbook: No public verification, 0/5. Published group policy and technical capability do not establish an operating manual supplied to independent Mobile Windscreens franchisees. The score is limited by the unverified ownership model, not a judgement on repair standards.

Structured onboarding: No public verification, 0/4. No franchise onboarding schedule, contractual training entitlement or owner readiness assessment could be attributed to the named opportunity. Employee learning and international technician exchanges concern a different relationship.

Documented brand experience: No public verification, 0/4. Customer-facing National Windscreens standards are observable, but no evidence connects their contractual delivery to a current Mobile Windscreens franchise. Brand consistency in a corporate network is not automatically franchisor support.

One central resource location: No public verification, 0/3. No current franchise resource portal or controlled collection of owner tools was verified. A corporate booking system or staff intranet would not by itself prove that independent owners receive the required resources.

Launch without constant founder involvement: No public verification, 0/4. The legal seller, agreement and launch support are unverified. It would therefore be inappropriate to assume a new franchise owner can launch through an established team, even though related corporate operations continue trading.

03 Launch Critical Gap0/20

Launch: The recorded homepage belongs to a broadband provider and the opportunity field is blank. Searches did not establish a current ownership proposition, application route or discovery process attributable to this named franchise.

Clear franchise proposition: No public verification, 0/5. No current ownership proposition was identified for this exact entry. The row should not borrow the proposition of Screen Rescue, Optic-Kleer or another business merely because those networks also repair vehicle glass.

Targeted applicant attraction: No public verification, 0/4. The searched official, corporate and directory material did not establish applicant-targeted promotion for a Mobile Windscreens franchise. Generic references to mobile windscreen work are service descriptions rather than brand-specific recruitment evidence.

Ownership enquiry journey: No public verification, 0/4. The recorded Plusnet URL cannot provide a relevant franchise-enquiry journey. An active glass repair booking route under another brand serves motorists and is not a substitute for an ownership application.

Pre-acceptance discovery: No public verification, 0/4. No discovery meeting sequence, suitability assessment, owner validation or pre-agreement due-diligence route was located for a current franchise. Its absence from public verification is recorded without inventing how private negotiations might work.

Ownership go-to-market plan: No public verification, 0/3. The corporate group’s distribution investment and geographic service coverage do not establish a franchise recruitment launch plan. No attributable candidate audience, ownership campaign, territory offer or recruitment timetable was verified.

04 Grow Critical Gap0/20

Grow: Corporate acquisitions, fitting-centre coverage and employee hiring are different growth activities from recruiting independent franchise owners. No current Mobile Windscreens ownership funnel or territory-development programme could be substantiated.

Monthly ownership enquiries: No public verification, 0/5. No monthly franchise ownership-enquiry evidence is attributable to Mobile Windscreens. Motorist calls, insurer referrals and technician job applications are separate populations and must not be used as recruitment leads.

Enquiry sources and best prospects: No public verification, 0/4. No current ownership source reporting or assessment of suitable applicant channels was verified. Search prominence for the generic service term would not reveal the quality of prospective business owners.

Ownership conversion: No public verification, 0/4. No applicant cohort, qualification stages, agreement count or conversion period was found. Corporate branch openings and acquisition transactions cannot be converted into a franchise recruitment conversion measure.

Next territories: No public verification, 0/3. No current franchise-territory availability or sequenced ownership expansion plan was established. The National Windscreens fitting-centre map describes service coverage and does not demonstrate areas available to franchise investors.

Consistent recruitment without founder-driven conversations: No public verification, 0/4. The historical sale transferred a corporate operation and management arrangements. It does not demonstrate a repeatable present-day franchise recruitment team operating without founder involvement; the franchise seller itself remains unverified.

05 Amplify Critical Gap0/20

Amplify: National Windscreens has customer-facing infrastructure, but the reviewed evidence does not establish independent Mobile Windscreens owners receiving that support under a franchise agreement. Related corporate capabilities are recorded as context without awarding franchise points.

Local customer acquisition support: No public verification, 0/5. Related service infrastructure can generate glass-repair demand, but no evidence establishes support delivered to independent Mobile Windscreens franchisees. Group sales capability cannot be allocated to an ownership population that has not been identified.

Every owner represented online: No public verification, 0/4. A national fitting-centre locator is not a verified roster of Mobile Windscreens franchise owners. No complete owner-to-local-page reconciliation is possible without a current owner list and confirmed franchise relationship.

Continuing local marketing plan: No public verification, 0/4. No continuing local marketing plan for independently owned Mobile Windscreens territories was verified. Corporate customer communication and national insurer relationships concern the associated service network and are not automatically franchise benefits.

Individual owner enquiry and performance tracking: No public verification, 0/3. Published customer-experience technology does not establish individual franchisee enquiry attribution or commercial review. The relevant accountabilities, data access and owner-level reporting have not been substantiated for this entry.

Customers beyond personal networks: No public verification, 0/4. The related corporate brand serves motorists and commercial accounts beyond personal networks. However, there is no verified evidence that a current Mobile Windscreens franchise owner can access those channels under an ownership agreement.

0/100 Overall Five Fibre score

Five Fibre score: 0/100. Assess 0/20, Build 0/20, Launch 0/20, Grow 0/20, Amplify 0/20.

Assessment band: Not Franchise Ready.

This entry needs identity resolution before it can be treated as a current franchise opportunity. The recorded homepage is Plusnet, a broadband business, and the franchise opportunity field is blank. The reviewed public record does identify a vehicle-glass company called Mobile Windscreens Limited, but does not establish that it currently sells or supports independent franchises under that name. The zero scores mean that the 25 franchise-specific criteria cannot presently be verified for the identified entry. They are not a statement that National Windscreens provides poor services, that its staff lack training or that all historically associated operations have closed.

Companies House identifies Mobile Windscreens Limited as company 01370175 and records its status as liquidation. The insolvency page specifies a members’ voluntary liquidation commencing on 27 May 2026, with a declaration of solvency on the same date. The filing history includes the relevant resolutions and liquidator appointment. This is a material distinction from simply describing the business as failed or insolvent. The public register supports the legal status of the named entity; it does not by itself establish what happened to every customer contract, asset, employee or related trading activity. No such wider conclusion has been assumed.

There is also positive evidence of continuing related commercial activity. Cary Group’s April 2026 announcement describes investment in the Bolsover distribution facility supporting Charles Pugh Glass and National Windscreens. The current National Windscreens fitting-centre and careers pages show a functioning service and employer network. These observations make it particularly important to distinguish the liquidation of one legal entity from closure of an entire customer-facing brand. Equally, continuity of repair services does not establish that a franchise bearing the old entity’s name remains available to investors. Both mistakes would give the reader an inaccurate picture of the opportunity.

The historical ownership evidence points towards corporate development. Grant Thornton describes advising the founder and principal shareholder, George Douglas, on the sale of Mobile Windscreens to Ryds Bilglas, allowing him to exit while the existing management team retained an equity interest. That is an identifiable transaction and management succession, not evidence that local operators bought franchise territories. National Windscreens’ sustainability history subsequently describes restructuring involving the acquired businesses into Cary UK. Company 02098007 is currently recorded as active under the Cary UK name. It is a separate legal record, so its incorporation date and current status must not be silently substituted for those of Mobile Windscreens Limited.

The operating measures also need careful handling. Fitting centres describe premises, mobile units describe service vehicles, technicians describe people and consortium members describe participating businesses. None of those totals automatically equals the number of independent franchise owners. A business may have many centres and vehicles while being operated by a small number of corporate entities. Conversely, membership of a national consortium does not establish the same contractual structure as a consumer-facing franchise. The assessment therefore does not import a network count, investment figure or territorial claim from National Windscreens, Cary Group or another windscreen-repair franchise into this row.

Assess cannot be awarded points merely because there is a credible underlying market for glass repair and replacement. A useful franchise assessment requires an identifiable seller, a defined transferable offer and evidence about how an owner makes money. Those foundations were not found for the current entry. The historical business may have had substantial commercial value, but a corporate sale price, group turnover or general market demand would not establish a realistic owner profit model. Before a reader can make a useful comparison with other opportunities, the record needs the current trading identity and confirmation of whether any independent franchise ownership arrangement is actually offered.

Build presents a similar attribution problem. National Windscreens publishes material about standards, technology and staff development, and its service infrastructure plainly involves operational systems. Giving this row credit for those systems would imply that a Mobile Windscreens franchise purchaser receives particular resources and support. The reviewed evidence does not establish that entitlement. Technical training for an employed fitter, a workshop manager’s procedures and an independent owner’s operating manual serve different roles. A defensible score needs a current franchise relationship and a description of what that relationship includes, rather than assuming that a sophisticated parent group provides every franchise benefit to every associated operation.

Launch and Grow must also remain separate from customer service and employment. A motorist booking a repair is not enquiring about ownership. A technician applying for a job is not entering a franchise discovery process. A corporate acquisition or new distribution centre is not a newly recruited franchisee. No attributable current ownership application route, applicant qualification sequence, monthly enquiry record or expansion programme was verified. The correct response is to record that limitation explicitly. It would be misleading to construct an apparently complete recruitment story using evidence gathered for a different commercial purpose, even where the names and geography overlap.

Amplify is not a judgement on whether the related service brand can acquire customers. Its fitting-centre locator and national account relationships indicate routes through which repair demand can be served. The unverified element is whether independent Mobile Windscreens franchise owners exist and receive those benefits through a defined agreement. Without that relationship, owner-level marketing plans, local online coverage and performance reporting cannot be substantiated. This is why the assessment does not award partial franchise points merely for observing a functioning customer website. Attribution comes before evaluating the strength of the support.

The existing publishing status, recruitment status, description, URLs and factual fields have been preserved because this review is restricted to sources and Five Fibre assessment columns. The current description already raises the identity issue, and the recruitment field is Inactive. The next data-governance decision should therefore concern whether the entry belongs in a public franchise comparison at all, or whether a demonstrably different current opportunity should be researched as its own record. It should not be presented as an actionable investment simply because the workbook retains Published status. The evidence collected here provides a specific basis for that decision without making an unauthorised status or identity change.

Assess: Resolve the exact current business identity and verify whether an independent franchise ownership offer exists before presenting the record as an investment opportunity.

Build: If a current franchise is confirmed, obtain attributable operating, onboarding and owner-support evidence rather than transferring corporate staff capabilities into the score.

Launch: Establish the correct official ownership page, legal seller and discovery route; the recorded broadband website is unrelated to the named glass operation.

Grow: Verify any actual owner population and available territories, keeping corporate branches, consortium members, employees and acquisitions separate.

Amplify: Only assess local owner acquisition and reporting once the current franchise relationship and entitlement to national customer channels are evidenced.

Benchmark

How this network compares.

Overall, against the whole Index

This network0

UK Index average64

Overall, against Automotive (30 networks)

This network0

Industry average63

Explore Automotive in the UK Franchise Data Explorer

Sources

Research sources.

11 public sources used for this profile

Keep your profile accurate

This profile is built from independently researched public information. If you represent this network, take the Five Fibre scorecard for it. We check your answers against our research before any score changes.

Update your Five Fibre scores

Something out of date?

Franchise information changes. If something on this profile is wrong or has changed, tell us and we’ll check it.

Tell us what’s changed

The Five Fibre Franchise Growth Scorecard

Want to assess your own network?

See where your franchise growth foundations are strong, where they are exposed and where growth may be getting blocked. Twenty five questions, around five minutes.

Take the scorecard