Blatant disregard by Authorisations and Customer care division on emails

I am extremely disappointed and frustrated with the service we have received from Liquid Capital, which falls drastically in contrast to the reviews I am reading here. When we were first introduced to Liquid Capital through the dealership’s credit agent, the policy was presented glamourously. Although no car fundi, I previously did own a car and therefore specifically asked if certain repairs were covered including the cambelt and brakes. I was met with a yes and shown on the cover paper where it is found. This was a kia staff. A year later when the vehicle was due for service, we experienced the first hell. The service was met with continued delays and lack of responses, with even the service agent spending endless hours during a busy period to help us. The problem was between Liquid Capital and Kia Motors where the vehicle was purchased from. Now, we decided to the avoid the December rush and take the car in for service only to be told that Liquid Capital cannot pay for it because it was too early. Eventually they agreed after understanding their delays last year. The service centre brought to our attention that our brakes and cambelt needed to be replaced and they escalated the quotation to Liquid Capital. It has since been a nightmare accepting what the cusotmer care was telling us followed by the actual response we received from aurthorisations. What should have been a straightforward process is again leaving us in jeopardy. Liquid Capital refused to cover the cambelt and brakes, both of which should be covered as per the agent at Kia who showed this to us on the documentation. At LC, the authorisations team first denied the request, claiming it was "too early" for these items, despite confirmation from the service center that these parts needed replacement. Only after significant follow-up and pressure did they agree to partially cover the cambelt, leaving out the brakes despite previous assurances of comprehensive coverage. So how does this work? If you are covering part, does it not look like an attempt to save profits?

We have sent multiple emails seeking clarification and resolution, yet none have responded.