*****ulent Lowballing: Misleading valuation practices on a total loss claim by using incorrect M&M code

Blink by MiWay handled a straightforward total‑loss claim by repeatedly using the wrong M&M (model) code to value my car, ignoring my written corrections, and then telling me to “lodge a dispute” instead of simply fixing their own data. Claim handlers made ridiculous claims about mileage not being important in the valuation of a vehicle when I asked why my mileage was quoted in miles.

My car was bought brand new in 2025 for R549,999 and is insured with MiWay/Blink on a retail value basis, as defined in their policy wording with reference to the TransUnion Auto Dealers Guide. In both their original and “updated” assessment reports, MiWay used an incorrect M&M code, which corresponds to a base‑model variant, not the derivative I actually purchased. Using this incorrect code, their report produced a TransUnion retail value of only R389,800 and a pre‑accident value of R387,300. That is an enormous drop from a R549,999 purchase price in just seven months, driven largely by the use of a cheaper model code.

From 25 February 2026 onwards, I repeatedly pointed out in writing that:The model description in their report was wrong.The M&M/TransUnion code they had selected did not match the car on my policy.Using a base‑model code would inevitably produce a much lower value than the correct derivative. (Claim handlers are Rito Maluleke and Nomhle Mabe)

Despite this, MiWay’s “updated” report of 8 March 2026 still shows:The same base‑model description.The same M&M code.A retail value of R389,800. In other words, they corrected a minor detail (year of registration) but left the fundamental error – the model code - unchanged.

When I raised this again, I was told I should lodge a dispute, which is inappropriate when the problem is the insurer’s continued use of objectively incorrect data, not a genuine difference of opinion.

MiWay refused to correct the code and value, I had to pay out of my own pocket for an independent assessor. The independent assessor’s report confirms:Correct M&M code: (the proper code for my actual derivative). New value: R549,999 (matching what I paid).Retail value: R482,440 using that correct code.

Compare that to MiWay’s figures based on the wrong code. The difference in retail value alone is almost R100 000, purely because MiWay insists on using a cheaper model code instead of the correct one.

For anyone considering insurance with MiWay / Blink, please be aware that even on a straightforward total‑loss claim with clear documentation, they persisted with an incorrect model code that significantly lowballed the settlement. If this is how total loss claims are handled, I would urge potential customers to look very carefully at their options before placing their trust in MiWay.