Claim handling concerns – escalation in progress

Policy number : ***. Claim NO: ***

Core Issue: My claim was rejected on the basis that my interaction with iWYZE on 29 December constituted a “quote” and not a valid change to my policy. I dispute this.

On 29 December, following the loss event, iWYZE claims contacted me. During that interaction, I was asked whether I wanted to increase my household contents cover to R500,000, and my risk address was updated accordingly.

I re**** on the information and guidance provided to me during that call. At no point was it communicated that this was merely a quotation with no effect, nor was I warned that I would not be covered under those changes.

Prior to the loss, I had an active policy with cover of R100,000. I had recently moved into the property but had cancelled the lease due to the house not being fit for human occupation. The fire then occurred.

The current position taken by iWYZE, that this interaction was only a “quote”, is inconsistent with how it was presented to me at the time and appears to be a retrospective recharacterisation.

Additional Context: Reference has been made to alleged malicious intent in relation to the loss event. This matter is currently subject to an ongoing legal process and has not been concluded and the individual believed to be responsible was not permitted on my property, and the incident involved forced entry.

It is therefore not appropriate for this to be treated as a settled basis for rejecting the claim, particularly where the primary issue relates to the validity of cover and the communication provided on 29 December.

Process Concerns: I raised a concern regarding the appointed assessor and requested that the matter be reviewed. On the same day, I received the rejection outcome.

Thereafter, the customer complaints department communicated that a conclusion had already been reached and that the claim was rejected, without providing a meaningful opportunity for me to fully present my version of events before that conclusion was made.

I was then directed to escalate the matter further through the disputes process.

This sequence of events raises concerns regarding the fairness and objectivity of the process followed.

Post-Claim Conduct: Following the rejection of my claim: – My policy was cancelled on the same day – A credit was processed to my account without clear explanation – Multiple requests for clarity and supporting information have not been adequately addressed

Position: I am disputing the basis on which the claim has been declined, specifically the interpretation of the 29 December interaction, as well as the manner in which the assessment and complaints process has been conducted.

I will be proceeding with formal escalation on this basis.