Incorrect model of car captured resulting in higher premiums

3 months have passed and I am still awaiting proof of the details provided regarding inception of policy ie. Incorrect model of car was captured resulting in a higher premium being paid by member. The fault was rectified but no apology nor refund has been received. It took multiple calls and each time I was informed that the query has been sitting under the ownership of a manager.

It seemed that no manager wanted to pursue the query. I was told the manager whom the query was escalated to stated that the call center agent who closed the sale was not in his team. I was informed that Auto & General admitted to capturing the details incorrectly. The correct model was provided initially but the call center agent claimed to not find it in the system so opted to select a higher priced model which resulted in a higher premium for the client ( this would have been to the call center agents knowledge ) This vital detail would also have meant that any possible claim downline would be refuted by the establishment. I was informed by Nishandran Dass that the client agreed to the " most popular" model being selected but no proof has been provided. This I find to be highly alarming. Is it common practice for a car insurance company to select " the most common model" when model supp**** is not found to be on the system.

Strange that another consultant found the correct model on the system easily. Admission of guilt on the establishments part was received but this story changed once the query landed under another manager.

This perturbing scenario has been treated rather flippantly I suspect because risk was apportioned to the client rather than the establishment . Notation of vital information pertaining to the policy seems to be disregarded and this could prove an expensive mistake making null n void all premiums paid to the service provider. This is a matter of queries being timeously and properly and professionally investigated and dealt with. I would like this to be investigated. It has now been 3 months. I find it difficult to believe that the client would agree to an incorrect model of car being insured as it is of common knowledge that all details of the vehicle be accurately supp****.