Based on recent customer reviews, Guardrisk Insurance draws sustained criticism over claim outcomes, especially device cover administered through partners such as Techsured, Viva Cover and MonitorSA, along with vehicle warranty, tyre, building and gap cover products. Policyholders describe rejections citing wear and tear, negligence, or theft without force, plus long waits for feedback, unanswered dispute emails, unresolved cancellations and debit orders on accounts where no policy is held. A smaller group praises named consultants for fast, friendly assistance on shortfall and warranty claims, showing service quality varies widely between administrators.
Replied to 98% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 28h 18m
TrustIndex
2.8
Ranking
#76
in Insurance
Reply Time
28h 5m
NPS Score
-91
Recommended: Unlikely
Replied to 98% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 28h 18m
Nov '25 - Oct '26
Frequently Asked Questions About Guardrisk Insurance
What do customers say about Guardrisk Insurance?
Based on recent customer reviews, Guardrisk Insurance draws sustained criticism over claim outcomes, especially device cover administered through partners such as Techsured, Viva Cover and MonitorSA, along with vehicle warranty, tyre, building and gap cover products. Policyholders describe rejections citing wear and tear, negligence, or theft without force, plus long waits for feedback, unanswered dispute emails, unresolved cancellations and debit orders on accounts where no policy is held. A smaller group praises named consultants for fast, friendly assistance on shortfall and warranty claims, showing service quality varies widely between administrators.
Is Guardrisk Insurance trustworthy?
Guardrisk Insurance has a TrustIndex of 2.8 out of 10 on Hellopeter, based on 49 reviews in the last 12 months. They reply to 98% of negative reviews, typically within 28 hours 18 min. Hellopeter has tracked Guardrisk Insurance across 761 total reviews. How is the TrustIndex calculated? →
Recent reviews (49)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your Experience1 reviews | Active since Jun 2016
DO NOT use Guardrisk ADMED GAP cover
Guardrisk product with Alexforbes Member Webinar l Admed Gap Product changes Whatever you do for GAP cover, DO NOT use ADMED GUARDRISK Gap Cover. I have had the cover through AlexForbes for about 3 years and paid in the region of R500 a month. I have submitted my first claim after breaking my leg. The claim is for small amounts that Discovery would not pay for on the PMB submission and for X-rays post the operation to confirm the healing or a further operation required on the ankle. First there is no system, so everything is email and then every SMS/Email advises that they want more documents that are on the prior emails submitted. When you phone the call centre, then the consultant advises yes I found the email and will submit it as everything was provided on the 30 September. Its back and forth and back and forth even though the 4 claims are all on the same application. As at today, another SMS/Email requesting the doctors account submitted in the original claim submission. It is VERY hard to do business with them. Second, the claims are immediately repudiated so honestly there is no point. I submitted 4 claims: 1. 3 xrays - two done a week after the operation, one done two weeks after the operation 2. in the emergency room, a temporary cast had to be put on the leg as it was very badly broken. 3. in the operating theater, a cast had to be done after 5 *****s were inserted Small claims but all related to the one incident. The worst experience EVER.
1 reviews | Active since Jun 2016
DO NOT use Guardrisk ADMED GAP cover
Guardrisk product with Alexforbes Member Webinar l Admed Gap Product changes Whatever you do for GAP cover, DO NOT use ADMED GUARDRISK Gap Cover. I have had the cover through AlexForbes for about 3 years and paid in the region of R500 a month. I have submitted my first claim after breaking my leg. The claim is for small amounts that Discovery would not pay for on the PMB submission and for X-rays post the operation to confirm the healing or a further operation required on the ankle. First there is no system, so everything is email and then every SMS/Email advises that they want more documents that are on the prior emails submitted. When you phone the call centre, then the consultant advises yes I found the email and will submit it as everything was provided on the 30 September. Its back and forth and back and forth even though the 4 claims are all on the same application. As at today, another SMS/Email requesting the doctors account submitted in the original claim submission. It is VERY hard to do business with them. Second, the claims are immediately repudiated so honestly there is no point. I submitted 4 claims: 1. 3 xrays - two done a week after the operation, one done two weeks after the operation 2. in the emergency room, a temporary cast had to be put on the leg as it was very badly broken. 3. in the operating theater, a cast had to be done after 5 *****s were inserted Small claims but all related to the one incident. The worst experience EVER.
1 reviews | Active since Oct 2026
I need to cancel a policy ASAP , opened 2019 since the is poor communication and structure
I have opened a funeral plan with Mr Price underwritten by GuardRisk from 2019, to date i dont have a policy number, numerous email was sent to *** for policy document but a generic document as sent not with my details and people covered , furthermore agents who calls to upgrade cannot aswer who is coverd and policy number , opt to go to the store Mr price Randburg and 25 Sep 2026, i was kept on the call without help and emails were sent to terminate the contract to give sufficient notice to avoid deductions in October , 29 September 2026 todate no respond , can have feedback and cancllation asap with no pernalty PLEASE
1 reviews | Active since Oct 2026
I need to cancel a policy ASAP , opened 2019 since the is poor communication and structure
I have opened a funeral plan with Mr Price underwritten by GuardRisk from 2019, to date i dont have a policy number, numerous email was sent to *** for policy document but a generic document as sent not with my details and people covered , furthermore agents who calls to upgrade cannot aswer who is coverd and policy number , opt to go to the store Mr price Randburg and 25 Sep 2026, i was kept on the call without help and emails were sent to terminate the contract to give sufficient notice to avoid deductions in October , 29 September 2026 todate no respond , can have feedback and cancllation asap with no pernalty PLEASE
1 reviews | Active since May 2020
Paid premiums for 2 years, but when I finally needed to claim, I felt dismissed and unfairly treated. A frustrating
Extremely disappointing experience with Viva Cover and Guardrisk I am extremely disappointed with the way my insurance claim was handled by Viva Cover and Guardrisk. I have been paying my insurance premiums for two years, trusting that I would receive assistance and protection should something happen to my insured phone. Unfortunately, when I eventually needed to make a claim, my experience was extremely frustrating and disappointing. I insured my Huawei Nova Y62 Plus, and unfortunately the phone was ****** while I was travelling in Johannesburg after returning from the Northern Cape. I followed the required process and provided the documentation requested from me, including an affidavit and certified copy of my ***. I also made every effort to obtain supporting documentation regarding the purchase of the phone, as the phones had been purchased collectively through a funding company. What has been particularly frustrating is the way my claim was handled and the exclusion that was re**** upon to reject it. I was informed that theft/loss from a person is only covered where there is force or threat, and that my circumstances did not meet the requirements. This left me extremely disappointed because, from a customer's perspective, theft is theft. I struggle to understand why I would need to have my safety placed at risk or be subjected to force or a threat before my ****** phone would qualify for cover. I certainly do not believe that a customer should have to put themselves in danger for an insurance policy to respond. I understand that insurance policies have terms, conditions and exclusions. However, my concern is not simply that there was an exclusion — it is how the situation was handled and how the exclusion was app**** to my circumstances. After paying my premiums for two years without needing to claim, I expected that when I genuinely needed the cover, my claim would be handled fairly and with consideration for the circumstances. Instead, I was left feeling that the process was more focused on finding a reason not to pay the claim than on assisting me as a customer. I eventually escalated the matter through a formal complaint and had to take the matter further through the relevant complaints process. What should have been a straightforward insurance claim has consequently become a lengthy and frustrating experience. I took out insurance because I expected protection when something unfortunate happened. Unfortunately, this experience has seriously affected my confidence in both Viva Cover and Guardrisk and in the value of the cover I have been paying for. I hope that this complaint is taken seriously and that the handling of claims and customer complaints is reviewed, particularly where exclusions are re**** upon. Companies: Viva Cover / Guardrisk Issue: Handling of insurance claim and subsequent complaint Desired resolution: A fair reconsideration of my claim and an appropriate resolution to my complaint.
1 reviews | Active since May 2020
Paid premiums for 2 years, but when I finally needed to claim, I felt dismissed and unfairly treated. A frustrating
Extremely disappointing experience with Viva Cover and Guardrisk I am extremely disappointed with the way my insurance claim was handled by Viva Cover and Guardrisk. I have been paying my insurance premiums for two years, trusting that I would receive assistance and protection should something happen to my insured phone. Unfortunately, when I eventually needed to make a claim, my experience was extremely frustrating and disappointing. I insured my Huawei Nova Y62 Plus, and unfortunately the phone was ****** while I was travelling in Johannesburg after returning from the Northern Cape. I followed the required process and provided the documentation requested from me, including an affidavit and certified copy of my ***. I also made every effort to obtain supporting documentation regarding the purchase of the phone, as the phones had been purchased collectively through a funding company. What has been particularly frustrating is the way my claim was handled and the exclusion that was re**** upon to reject it. I was informed that theft/loss from a person is only covered where there is force or threat, and that my circumstances did not meet the requirements. This left me extremely disappointed because, from a customer's perspective, theft is theft. I struggle to understand why I would need to have my safety placed at risk or be subjected to force or a threat before my ****** phone would qualify for cover. I certainly do not believe that a customer should have to put themselves in danger for an insurance policy to respond. I understand that insurance policies have terms, conditions and exclusions. However, my concern is not simply that there was an exclusion — it is how the situation was handled and how the exclusion was app**** to my circumstances. After paying my premiums for two years without needing to claim, I expected that when I genuinely needed the cover, my claim would be handled fairly and with consideration for the circumstances. Instead, I was left feeling that the process was more focused on finding a reason not to pay the claim than on assisting me as a customer. I eventually escalated the matter through a formal complaint and had to take the matter further through the relevant complaints process. What should have been a straightforward insurance claim has consequently become a lengthy and frustrating experience. I took out insurance because I expected protection when something unfortunate happened. Unfortunately, this experience has seriously affected my confidence in both Viva Cover and Guardrisk and in the value of the cover I have been paying for. I hope that this complaint is taken seriously and that the handling of claims and customer complaints is reviewed, particularly where exclusions are re**** upon. Companies: Viva Cover / Guardrisk Issue: Handling of insurance claim and subsequent complaint Desired resolution: A fair reconsideration of my claim and an appropriate resolution to my complaint.
1 reviews | Active since Sept 2021
**** service
Shocking / Poor service . Been without a car for 5 months , logged a claim with Innovation Grouop only for your useless teams to tell me they wont accept a Disnostics from Audi who manufactured my car ? I was then informed to mail Andile , mailed him and he said I will have feedback in 5-7 working days. I waited 10 working days only to ne told that no claim was logged when this Andile clown proceeded to tell me I should mail him exactly what they said and why they rejected the claim as my car was manufactured from Audi. Iv asked more than twice for Aphiwe the Manager to give me a call and no feedback nor phone call . Pleaese note that my lawyer will be in contact for loss of income for the period of 5 months and I am in sales so this will about to about R 250k . See you guys in Court
1 reviews | Active since Sept 2021
**** service
Shocking / Poor service . Been without a car for 5 months , logged a claim with Innovation Grouop only for your useless teams to tell me they wont accept a Disnostics from Audi who manufactured my car ? I was then informed to mail Andile , mailed him and he said I will have feedback in 5-7 working days. I waited 10 working days only to ne told that no claim was logged when this Andile clown proceeded to tell me I should mail him exactly what they said and why they rejected the claim as my car was manufactured from Audi. Iv asked more than twice for Aphiwe the Manager to give me a call and no feedback nor phone call . Pleaese note that my lawyer will be in contact for loss of income for the period of 5 months and I am in sales so this will about to about R 250k . See you guys in Court
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2025
Worst of them all. I hate companies like these
Guard Risk and Capital Legacy say they won't pay my claim because they do not because my brother is dead. My brother has passed away for months now and they still don't believe me when their competitors like Old Mutual have paid the claim. Please don't take up and of their products it will help you. I am enough with these two companies. Maybe I should dig up my brother and take him to their office as proof maybe.
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2025
Worst of them all. I hate companies like these
Guard Risk and Capital Legacy say they won't pay my claim because they do not because my brother is dead. My brother has passed away for months now and they still don't believe me when their competitors like Old Mutual have paid the claim. Please don't take up and of their products it will help you. I am enough with these two companies. Maybe I should dig up my brother and take him to their office as proof maybe.
1 reviews | Active since Mar 2019
Unclear Policy Changes and Disappointing Claims Service
Dear Medgap, I am writing to formally request that Medgap reconsider the outcome of my three hospital admission claims, totalling R6,500 x 3 = R19,500. I called Medgap on Friday, 4 September 2026, and was only then informed that my policy had been moved from Medgap to Bgap, with the consequence that I could no longer use a non-network hospital without facing a significant financial shortfall. My concern is not simply the outcome of the claims, but how this change was communicated to me as a client. I acknowledge that a letter was sent to me. However, this was sent as what appeared to be a standard increase/renewal communication. There was no clear warning in bold, red, or otherwise prominent wording explaining that this was a significant change to my cover and that using a non-network hospital could result in a substantial co-payment. Furthermore, terminology such as “non-DSP” was used. As a consumer and layperson, I should not be expected to automatically understand that this means a non-network hospital and, more importantly, that it could have such a significant financial consequence. There was also no separate form requiring me to confirm whether I accepted the change, nor was I contacted by Medgap to explain the implications of the change. I do not have a broker who could have assisted me in understanding what this communication meant. The communication was also sent around month-end/year-end, when people are busy with their personal and professional commitments. A change that materially affects the benefits and financial protection provided by a gap cover policy should, in my view, have been communicated in a much clearer and more prominent manner. I have been a Medgap client since 2023 and have paid my premiums consistently. I therefore reasonably believed that I had the level of protection I had when I took out the policy. What makes this situation even more concerning is my previous experience with Medgap's claims administration. On two previous occasions, I experienced problems where claims were incorrectly processed despite your employees being trained to deal with these matters. For example, in 2023, I submitted a hospital admission claim. The claim was rejected and I was simply referred to pages 19 and 20 of the policy documentation. When I queried the matter again in 2025, after another hospital admission claim was paid, I was informed that the original 2023 claim had been incorrectly captured by a staff member. The claim was subsequently paid, approximately two years later. This demonstrates that mistakes can and do happen on the administration side, even with trained employees. I also experienced an issue with Bonitas in 2022 when I submitted documentation relating to my son. Despite the information being correctly completed, the documentation referred to him as an “adopted son”, which was incorrect. Again, this required additional clarification and follow-up from my side. I therefore find it extremely unfair that, as the consumer, I was expected to understand the full implications of a single letter containing industry terminology, without a clear explanation, separate notification, or confirmation process — while Medgap's own employees have previously made errors when processing my claims. If consumers are expected to carefully understand every technical term and implication in policy correspondence, then surely the same standard of accuracy and clarity should apply when claims are being processed. I also understand that I am not the only client who was unaware of this change. I have spoken to a colleague whose parents were similarly unaware of the change, and they will also be contacting Medgap regarding the matter. I have been with Medgap for approximately three years. During this relatively short period, I have experienced two instances where claims or documentation were incorrectly handled, requiring numerous calls, emails and follow-ups from my side. I am now facing a further situation where a major change to my cover was, in my opinion, not adequately communicated. This has left me extremely disappointed with the level of service provided. I have been with other service providers for significantly longer periods and have never experienced this level of difficulty when dealing with my cover or claims. I therefore respectfully request that Medgap reconsider all three hospital admission claims. The total amount at issue is: R6,500 x 3 = R19,500 I am asking Medgap to please exercise discretion and reconsider these claims in light of the circumstances surrounding the change in cover and the manner in which it was communicated. If Medgap is unable to approve the full amount, I would even ask that you consider a 50% settlement of the three claims, as a goodwill resolution. I have continued paying my premiums for the past eight months believing that I was receiving the protection I had originally signed up for. I understand that policies can change, but consumers should be given a clear, meaningful opportunity to understand and accept significant changes to their cover. I was not given a choice to actively accept this change, nor was the significance of the change clearly explained to me. I therefore plead with Medgap to look at this matter from the perspective of a long-standing paying client and reconsider the claims fairly and reasonably. I would appreciate a formal written response explaining the outcome of your reconsideration and the basis for the decision. I sincerely hope Medgap will take the circumstances into account and find a fair resolution.
1 reviews | Active since Mar 2019
Unclear Policy Changes and Disappointing Claims Service
Dear Medgap, I am writing to formally request that Medgap reconsider the outcome of my three hospital admission claims, totalling R6,500 x 3 = R19,500. I called Medgap on Friday, 4 September 2026, and was only then informed that my policy had been moved from Medgap to Bgap, with the consequence that I could no longer use a non-network hospital without facing a significant financial shortfall. My concern is not simply the outcome of the claims, but how this change was communicated to me as a client. I acknowledge that a letter was sent to me. However, this was sent as what appeared to be a standard increase/renewal communication. There was no clear warning in bold, red, or otherwise prominent wording explaining that this was a significant change to my cover and that using a non-network hospital could result in a substantial co-payment. Furthermore, terminology such as “non-DSP” was used. As a consumer and layperson, I should not be expected to automatically understand that this means a non-network hospital and, more importantly, that it could have such a significant financial consequence. There was also no separate form requiring me to confirm whether I accepted the change, nor was I contacted by Medgap to explain the implications of the change. I do not have a broker who could have assisted me in understanding what this communication meant. The communication was also sent around month-end/year-end, when people are busy with their personal and professional commitments. A change that materially affects the benefits and financial protection provided by a gap cover policy should, in my view, have been communicated in a much clearer and more prominent manner. I have been a Medgap client since 2023 and have paid my premiums consistently. I therefore reasonably believed that I had the level of protection I had when I took out the policy. What makes this situation even more concerning is my previous experience with Medgap's claims administration. On two previous occasions, I experienced problems where claims were incorrectly processed despite your employees being trained to deal with these matters. For example, in 2023, I submitted a hospital admission claim. The claim was rejected and I was simply referred to pages 19 and 20 of the policy documentation. When I queried the matter again in 2025, after another hospital admission claim was paid, I was informed that the original 2023 claim had been incorrectly captured by a staff member. The claim was subsequently paid, approximately two years later. This demonstrates that mistakes can and do happen on the administration side, even with trained employees. I also experienced an issue with Bonitas in 2022 when I submitted documentation relating to my son. Despite the information being correctly completed, the documentation referred to him as an “adopted son”, which was incorrect. Again, this required additional clarification and follow-up from my side. I therefore find it extremely unfair that, as the consumer, I was expected to understand the full implications of a single letter containing industry terminology, without a clear explanation, separate notification, or confirmation process — while Medgap's own employees have previously made errors when processing my claims. If consumers are expected to carefully understand every technical term and implication in policy correspondence, then surely the same standard of accuracy and clarity should apply when claims are being processed. I also understand that I am not the only client who was unaware of this change. I have spoken to a colleague whose parents were similarly unaware of the change, and they will also be contacting Medgap regarding the matter. I have been with Medgap for approximately three years. During this relatively short period, I have experienced two instances where claims or documentation were incorrectly handled, requiring numerous calls, emails and follow-ups from my side. I am now facing a further situation where a major change to my cover was, in my opinion, not adequately communicated. This has left me extremely disappointed with the level of service provided. I have been with other service providers for significantly longer periods and have never experienced this level of difficulty when dealing with my cover or claims. I therefore respectfully request that Medgap reconsider all three hospital admission claims. The total amount at issue is: R6,500 x 3 = R19,500 I am asking Medgap to please exercise discretion and reconsider these claims in light of the circumstances surrounding the change in cover and the manner in which it was communicated. If Medgap is unable to approve the full amount, I would even ask that you consider a 50% settlement of the three claims, as a goodwill resolution. I have continued paying my premiums for the past eight months believing that I was receiving the protection I had originally signed up for. I understand that policies can change, but consumers should be given a clear, meaningful opportunity to understand and accept significant changes to their cover. I was not given a choice to actively accept this change, nor was the significance of the change clearly explained to me. I therefore plead with Medgap to look at this matter from the perspective of a long-standing paying client and reconsider the claims fairly and reasonably. I would appreciate a formal written response explaining the outcome of your reconsideration and the basis for the decision. I sincerely hope Medgap will take the circumstances into account and find a fair resolution.