1 reviews | Active since Sept 2015
Failure to meet contract obligations
I have a policy with Motorite to cover, among others, the Car Engine. My car broke down and tests conducted revealed the followng:<br> <br> - possible injector failure on number 1 cylinder,<br> - possible fuel feed constant, causing piston in number 1 cylinder to melt, and<br> - engine seized<br> <br> On further testing the Injectors, no fuel contamination was picked up, I was told that the cause of the failure was due to normal wear & tear. According to my policy with them, a car that has travelled over 190000kms is treated as a used vehicle and the cover for the engine is R35000. To my suprise, when the company that is fixing my engine lodged a claim, they were told that Motorite will pay R9000 (incl. VAT). I made a follow-up with Motorite, and I was told the same (with no clear explanation). On checking on the policy, I have realised that the R9000 is a cover for \Over-fuelling". It is really not clear to me as to why they are not paying the R35000 as stipulated in the policy.<br> <br> My Identity Number is *** 087 and my Cell Number is ***. Thank you."""
the vehicle was assessed by an independent assessor and his finding was that the number 1 piston had melted severely and the corresponding cylinder sleeve severely damaged due to over-fueling and hence the reason why the administrators app**** the \overfueling\" benefit of R9000.00 as detailed in your policy handbook and limits of liability table. the damage was not caused by any failure of an internally lubricated mechanical engine component but rather due to excessive over -fueling causing excessive combustion temperatures and in turn causing the piston to physically melt.
the vehicle was assessed by an independent assessor and his finding was that the number 1 piston had melted severely and the corresponding cylinder sleeve severely damaged due to over-fueling and hence the reason why the administrators app**** the \overfueling\" benefit of R9000.00 as detailed in your policy handbook and limits of liability table. the damage was not caused by any failure of an internally lubricated mechanical engine component but rather due to excessive over -fueling causing excessive combustion temperatures and in turn causing the piston to physically melt.