1 reviews | Active since Nov 2016
Bunch of ********
<p>i would like to register my deepest disappointment with this insurance company. My possessions were ****** while my car was parked outside a club, opened a car and the investigation is ongoing. I informed the insurer and they rejected my claim as there was no sign of forced entry and no evidence the car was broken into. What really puzzled me is the fact that they never asked for the case number so that they could communicate with the police or even wait for the investigation to be concluded. What I fail to also understand is should I prescribe to ********* how they should operate; draw attention to themselves so that there are witnesses. It goes to show that had someone followed me and accosted me while parking and took my vehicle and possessions without there being witnesses then the claim would be rejected because there would not be evidence. Should I have been hijacked and the vehicle never recovered then I would not have been able to claim because there was no evidence to prove that I was actually hijacked. the case is ongoing but the insurer had decided that there is no evidence. They have concluded that I filled a false case with the SAPS. Does this mean that everywhere I go I have to be on the look out for cameras before I park so that should anything happen I can prove...and during all these examples stated I have to ensure that I have evidence when I'm clearly afraid. what I pick up from the insurer is that I should have staged the whole thing so that I can get a better chance of getting paid instead of being honest...I have yet ymto receive a rejection letter because I'm sure as hell not taking this matter lying down..I would appreciate your intervention.</p>
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.
We understand that the Customer Relations Team have been in contact with you before, and in order to assist or find an alternate resolution requested the possibility of video footage.
At no point do we say that the loss is not valid, however we refer you to the terms & conditions which explains that No Visible Forced Entry is an Exclusion, this is an Industry Wide stance to exclude instances where remote jamming is the cause of loss.
We will however escalate the matter to ensure that Customer Relations get in touch with you.
Apologies for the inconvenience caused.
Kind Regards,
The First for Women Team
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.
We understand that the Customer Relations Team have been in contact with you before, and in order to assist or find an alternate resolution requested the possibility of video footage.
At no point do we say that the loss is not valid, however we refer you to the terms & conditions which explains that No Visible Forced Entry is an Exclusion, this is an Industry Wide stance to exclude instances where remote jamming is the cause of loss.
We will however escalate the matter to ensure that Customer Relations get in touch with you.
Apologies for the inconvenience caused.
Kind Regards,
The First for Women Team
