Naked wants to underpay me for my Apple Watch and refuses to provide proof of where they got the replacement value

<div>My Apple Watch got damaged. I submitted a claim and it got approved. The consultant,++++&nbsp; sent me specifications of the watch they were going to send to me (Watch Series 9 GPS Aluminium Case with Sport Band (45mm) - S/M - Midnight). I requested some changes of which one was the size of the bands of the watch - I wanted M/L because S/M will be too small for me. I was provided feedback that they cannot make alterations to that and instead will payout. I got sent an email stating that the replacement value they found is R8300 of which I disputed because the cost of the same watch is R8900 on istore. When I disputed this, and requested proof of where they got the replacement value, as in the source, I’m getting sent a message saying I should read the policy wording. What does the policy wording have to do with the replacement value not being the same as what’s being shown on istore?! Why must you always throw policy wording to the customer’s face when all they are asking for is transparency in your process?!</div>