Rejected claim based on photograph!

<p>On 12 May 2017 my vehicle broke down outside Sedgefield with a faulty clutch. There was no indication that the clutch was worn, it just suddenly would not engage gears. The car was towed to George as that was where the closest accredited RMI workshop was located. I left the vehicle there and had to rent a vehicle from AVIS at the George Airport to get to Cape Town. On Monday 15 May 2017 I was contacted by the workshop saying that the clutch plate literally broke and that the slave cylinder and flywheel broke as a result. In the opinion of the workshop this was mechanical failure, exactly the reason why I took out the Innovation/Guardrisk Advanced Motor Drive Warranty and therefore should be covered. On 22 May I received an email saying that the claim was rejected based on their opinion that it was normal wear and tear! Imagine that. A clutch that gave no indication of being worn, just snapping and breaking the flywheel and slave cylinder is NOT mechanical failure. I tried phoning the call centre on the 22nd of May but after 4 attempts gave up. I managed to get through to the call centre on the 23rd where Curwin told me that their opinion was based on photographs sent by the workshop. He was quite adament that their opinion based on a photograph is sufficient evidence. When I asked why an assessor was not appointed, he calmly told me that they do not deem it necessary as they are satisfied that the damage was caused by normal wear and tear. Needless to say I now have to replace the slave cylinder, clutch kit and flywheel and pay for it myself. Please be aware that this policy will NOT give you peace of mind and that the money you spend on it is an absolute WASTE. </p>