ABSOLUTE REDICULOUSNESS FROM DISCOVERY INSURE

It seems Claims Assessor Isaac Ramarumo is employed to built up cases to void customer claims.

My dad took out a discovery Insure policy on a vehicle that is registered in my name. This was because I bought the car for my dad. Also the initial insurance plan was in my name because I had to take out an insurance policy when I bought the car. At inception of his insurance policy with Discovery he asked if he needed to add another driver knowing well that he would not be the only one using the car. The response was "the quote is an ‘open driver policy’, which means that it isn’t necessary to nominate a driver. Any person who has a valid drivers license will be covered, however not under the influence of alcohol/substances".

On 02 January 2021 my brother got into an accident while on his way to Wonderboom junction. Understanding that he has a valid driver's license and was not under any influence whatsoever my dad lodged a claim with Discovery Insure. The car was towed and declared a write off. After all required information had been submitted the matter was handed over to Isaac Ramarumo (Claims Assessor) who took his time to build up a case that can void the claim. Firstly he was unavailable when my dad had questions regarding the claim, and when he did contact my dad he took advantage of the fact that he could not express himself in English. He also contacted my brother who was the one involved in the accident but his questions were irrelevant to the claim. After we realized that the Claims assessor misunderstood my dad, my brother attempted to get hold of him to clarify the misunderstanding with no success. This misunderstanding was with regards to who the regular the driver is. How relevant is this to the claim after being told one did not have to nominate a driver as this is an open driver policy? Even their form does not make provision to nominate a regular driver.

Traffic department issued a driver's license to my brother, yet Isaac Ramarumo saw a need to question a friend about my brother's driving capabilities.

He further asked for previous insurance information probably to look for more loopholes and the information was provided. This is after he claimed that on the recordings (which we still have not received) we had said that we used Outsurance of which is incorrect. MiWay was the first service provider and that information was given to him.

After taking his time to try and look for loopholes, him and his team decided to reject the claim on grounds of misrepresentation of information alluding to "duty to inform the insurer correctly of details of the risk being insured and to update any changes to the risk that may occur" implying that incorrect was presented regarding the regular driver.

I fail to understand how this was necessary if the form itself does not make provision to nominate a regular driver, and when the client further asked whether he had to nominate was advised otherwise.

The period for them to respond to our dispute is said to be 30 days, yet we're given 7 days to collect the car from where it was towed. Who the will incur the costs of towing the car should the decision be overturned.

Absolute nonsense.