Vague policy wording used to their advantage to avoid paying claims

I have been with Msure for almost 2 years and for the first time trying to claim for a small scratch on my car door proved too much for them to help me with. I have 2 small scratches on my door for which the claim is rejected due to BS reasons. Firstly, they claim the distance between the 2 scratches exceeds what they deem within their policy, (this is not expressed in writing in the policy that more than one scratch equates to a single damage) and secondly, I am unable to claim for a single scratch if there are more than one on the panel (again this is not written in the policy). They keep quoting their policy to me, which is vague and ambiguous. The policy wording does not clearly mention that more than 1 scratch equates to a single damage; and does not clearly mention that more than one scratch on the panel prohibits me from claiming for even a single scratch. You can't make up rules as you see fit. If it is not explicitly written In black and white in the policy, then it cannot be law. Is this how you treat your paying customers? Leading them with false pretences then nailing them with vague policy and exaggerated responses to avoid payment of claim. I have wasted my money and honestly feel like I have been ****med!!!!!