On the intial submission of my claim I was advised that I was not on the database. The claim was put on hold for that reason. Then they requested AA reports which I provided and I was told on the 20th of March that my claim would be authorised within 15 minutes and nothing came of it. I then notified by email that they wanted to listen to the recordings that were made on the inception of the policy. The voice loogings were listed to by the respective consultants and my claim was rejected based on the fact that the car Tracker was not yet installed.
I called Thami who was not in the office and was redirected to Nombuso, who pulled a clause that was used to reject this claim and said the voice loggings also confirmed this. The clause was under basic excess point B as per below which refers to /Hi-jacking claims. This was not a or hijack claim but an accident damage claim? Why then was this rejected? I collected the car from the dealership on the 21st if you count 7 working days for installation was not yet reached on the day of the accident which was the 2nd March.
The policy schedule was interpreted incorrectly by them in order for my claim to be rejected.
0 comments