Formal Complaint and Demand for Full Settlement Misrepresentation, Premium Prejudice, and Lack of Consumer Protection (Policy/Claim Reference: *****7918)

I am writing to express my profound disappointment, growing distrust, and urgent demand for accountability regarding Budget Insurance’s handling of my total-loss claim following the accident on 19 December 2025. I firmly believe I am being misled, records are being misrepresented, and consumer-protection standards are not being upheld. The conduct I have experienced threatens my business operations and undermines confidence in Budget as a reliable partner for three insured vehicles. Key issues and my position 1) Misrepresentation about insurance history I did not state that my vehicle had four years of continuous insurance. I clearly indicated that the vehicle had no insurance for four years prior to obtaining cover and I was the reason I wanted the insurance. Budget’s claim that I misrepresented this history is false, and I require credible evidence to support such a misrepresentation claim. I have repeatedly asked for dispute records, including call recordings with the sales agent Mr. Christopher, but Budget has claimed no recordings exist. This is unacceptable and raises serious questions about record-keeping and honesty in the claims process. 2) In-person meeting allegations Mr/sLynette Veldtsman *** from Budget asserts that I met Mr. Christopher in person to discuss the policy/claim. I deny any such in-person meeting and have no recollection of meeting this agent. If she strongly believes that the meeting happened in person is odder because I do not even know any car insurance company that meet clients in person for signing up. If Budget (Lynette and Christopher) insists that such a meeting occurred, I demand precise evidence: date, time, location, attendees, sign-in sheets, and any supporting documents (emails, calendar entries, transcripts). If no evidence exists, Budget must retract the claim immediately. 3) Handling and transparency of the total-loss settlement Accident: 19 December 2025; vehicle written off. The “premium prejudice” deduction of 23.56%, should not even be happening without them giving a true reflection of the records. 4) Impact on my business and trust in Budget I currently insure three vehicles with Budget. The way this claim is being handled, together with alleged misrepresentation and unsupported in-person meeting claims has damaged my trust in Budget’s commitment to fair dealing and consumer protection. The incident involving the other driver (a Polo driver) and the liability assessment must be properly investigated and communicated, including any findings that could affect fault and compensation. What I am requesting (immediate, concrete actions) Full dispute records and evidence Copies of all dispute-related documents, including dispute disclosure forms, call logs, call recordings (if they exist), agent notes, emails, and any other communications related to inception and the claim. If call recordings are unavailable, provide formal justification and any alternative evidence (notes, calendars, logs) that substantiate Budget’s position. Verification of in-person meeting claim If such a meeting occurred, provide exact details (date, time, location) and all supporting evidence (sign-in sheets, minutes, emails, transcripts). If no evidence exists, issue a formal correction and withdraw the claim. Senior escalation and independent review Immediately escalate to a senior disputes manager or executive sponsor who can review the misrepresentation claim, call-record handling, and settlement calculation with independent oversight. Provide a clear timeline for responses and a description of the internal escalation process. External avenues if unresolved Clear information on regulatory complaint routes (ombudsman/regulator) and timelines. I reserve the right to pursue external consumer-protection channels if a prompt and satisfactory resolution is not achieved. Immediate corrective action Reversal of the 23.56% premium prejudice deduction if the misrepresentation claim is not supported by credible evidence. Interim hold on finalizing any disputed elements until credible records are provided. Acknowledgment of consumer protection failure A formal acknowledgment that misrepresentation or record-keeping gaps undermine consumer trust and the integrity of the claims process, with a commitment to corrective action to prevent recurrence. Preferred timeline Written responses and the requested actions within 5–10 business days from receipt of this complaint. Important: I am deeply disappointed by the handling of my claim and the apparent gaps in accountability and evidence. If Budget cannot provide credible, verifiable evidence to support the current position particularly regarding the misrepresentation claim, in-person meeting allegations, and the 23.56% premium prejudice deduction, I will pursue all available remedies, including external regulatory complaints, consumer-protection channels, and legal avenues.