Disappointing experience with Naked Single Item Insurance - Claim C***

I am extremely disappointed with my overall experience with Naked Insurance, particularly with how their Single Item Insurance handles device depreciation, insured values and transparency at claims stage.

I took out Single Item Insurance with Naked in September 2024, when my brand-new iPhone 16 Pro 256GB was insured for R29,000. I consistently paid my premiums every month without any issues.

Unfortunately, my phone was ****** and I submitted a claim (C***). My claim was approved, and I acknowledge that Naked did ultimately process the claim and settle it. The money has now been paid into my account, so this review is not being written to influence the outcome of my claim. I am sharing my honest experience now that the claim has been concluded.

The claims process, however, left me extremely frustrated.

Naked initially advised me that they had sourced a brand-new iPhone 16 Pro 256GB as a like-for-like replacement. I asked whether an iPhone 17 Pro 256GB, being the newer model, could be considered. When this was not possible, I requested the option of a cash settlement so that I could contribute the difference myself and purchase the newer model.

Naked ultimately offered a cash settlement of R21,199, calculated as a replacement value of R24,699 less my R3,500 excess. I understand that the policy states that the customer is responsible for keeping the insured value of the device up to date as it depreciates. However, this is where I believe Naked needs to seriously reconsider its approach from a consumer-fairness perspective.

I insured my brand-new phone for R29,000 and faithfully paid premiums while it was insured at that value. Yet by the time I needed to claim, Naked determined that the current replacement value was R24,699, while my excess remained R3,500.

Naked knows that electronic devices depreciate. Naked also knows that customers may not necessarily understand how quickly these values change or that they are expected to manually monitor and adjust their insured value through the app.

I therefore believe Naked should have a more proactive mechanism to alert customers when their insured value is significantly higher than the current replacement value, rather than placing the entire responsibility on the consumer while continuing to collect premiums based on the higher insured value.

The experience made me question the value I was actually receiving from the insurance.

The lack of transparency was another major concern. Naked told me that they had obtained quotations from their service providers and used those quotations to determine the R24,699 replacement value. I specifically requested those quotations for my records and so that I could understand how the value of my own insured device had been calculated.

Those quotations were not provided to me. I wasn’t asking for anything unreasonable. I simply wanted to understand the basis for the valuation being used to settle my claim. As a customer who had insured the device for R29,000 and paid premiums accordingly, I expected greater transparency around how the replacement value was determined.

Being told that supplier quotations existed, while not being provided with them after specifically requesting them, left me feeling that the claims process lacked transparency.

I appreciate that Naked approved my claim and provided a cash settlement option. However, being paid does not erase my concerns about how the product and claims process operate.

I initially chose Naked because I received several recommendations on Twitter/X, particularly for their Single Item Insurance. Those recommendations were a major reason I decided to insure my phone with Naked in the first place.

Unfortunately, my actual experience did not live up to those recommendations.

Naked has a convenient app and an attractive insurance concept, but in my experience, a convenient app is not enough if the customer is left to carry the responsibility of continuously monitoring depreciation and insured values without proactive guidance from the insurer.

I believe Naked needs to seriously review its approach to:

* device depreciation and insured values; * proactively alerting customers when they may be over-insured; * how premiums and excesses relate to changing replacement values; * transparency around supplier quotations and replacement valuations; and * ensuring customers genuinely understand the value of the cover they are paying for.

This was my first experience with Naked Insurance, and unfortunately it will also be my last.

I will be looking at alternative insurance options going forward, including TFM Brokers, which comes highly recommended to me.

The claim was settled, the money is in my account, but the experience has left me disappointed, frustrated and unwilling to insure another item with Naked.

I hope Naked takes this feedback seriously and makes changes that provide consumers with a more transparent, proactive and fair insurance experience.