False Advertising on Scratch and Dent Policy

Dear MotoVantage Complaints Department,

I am writing to lodge a formal complaint regarding my recent experience with my Scratch and Dent policy claim.

I submitted a claim for damage sustained when a motorized gate closed on the right side of my car. The damage was confined to a single vertical area of one panel. As per the policy, which covers minor damages up to R3,000 per claim, I expected that a mobile repair unit would be dispatched. Instead, I was referred to a panel beater in Durban, which is contrary to the service advertised.

Following the assessment, the panel beater provided a quote that was highly inflated and included damages unrelated to the specific incident. I was transparent and honest in my claim, disclosing only the damage that fell within the policy period. However, the assessment extended to a second panel and was used as the basis for rejection of my claim, even though the unrelated damage clearly predated my policy and was not part of my submission.

I have had to follow up three separate times with MotoVantage, with little to no feedback:

On the first occasion, I was told I had been contacted once but did not answer. No further attempt was made, and as your number may have been flagged as spam, I feel this was not a sufficient attempt to reach me.

On the second occasion, I was assured that the matter would be escalated to a manager and feedback provided the same day. No feedback was received.

On the third occasion, I was informed that my claim was rejected on the basis that all damages were taken into account. This directly contradicts the premise of a scratch and dent policy, which is designed to cover small, isolated incidents.

The implication of your decision is that claims will only be approved if a vehicle is entirely free of prior scratches or dents, which is unrealistic for the average customer who may take out such a policy after owning the vehicle for one or more years. Major damages are rightly excluded, but to reject minor, isolated claims due to unrelated pre-existing damage is unfair and misleading.

The manner in which my case was handled has left me extremely dissatisfied. The consultant I dealt with during my final interaction was rude, dismissive, and argumentative, and failed to provide any clear answers to my legitimate questions. This experience has eroded my trust in MotoVantage, leading me to cancel my policy immediately.

I am deeply disappointed that a product marketed under the premise of customer convenience and fairness, and endorsed by FNB, has instead resulted in such a frustrating and unprofessional experience.

I request that this complaint be formally acknowledged and investigated, and that I receive a written response outlining how MotoVantage intends to address both the mishandling of my claim and the misleading practices of its Scratch and Dent policy.

Yours sincerely, Raeesa Khan Policy Number: FNB***1