1 reviews | Active since May 2020
Ombudsman process flawed
Ombudsman ruled against me because I can't afford an "independent expert" to dispute the insurers "expert" ( which by the way opens room for you yourself as ombadsman are implying you cannot confirm impartiality of that expert). And in this whole process , gave the insurer multiple opportunities to engage back and forth or as you call it "gathering more information from insurer" why wasn't I given the same opportunities? Additionally, was not allowed to reach directly the person handling my case - the call Centre was such a mess that they even gave me the WRONG CASE, I'm sitting here with another person's confidential information right on my emails. Weeks before your conclusion , a third party, the car finance institution started pressuring me to sell the vehicle to them because "the ladies in the office" of where the vehicle is stored said the ombudsman ruled in insures favour. I emailed you on this, questioning how info like this gets out; and I would think you would have followed up on this as it questions the integrity of the office - zero response on that. Instead, the very ruling the car finance institution knew about ages ago. You are not for the consumer, you have not shown assistance & guidance for this process towards me.
Please provide me your OSTI reference number so that I can look into your matter.
Kind regards,
Ayanda Mazwi
Senior Assistant Ombudsman.
Please provide me your OSTI reference number so that I can look into your matter.
Kind regards,
Ayanda Mazwi
Senior Assistant Ombudsman.
Ref is M2446/19. Throughout the 6+ months period, the insurance company was given more than one opportunity to engage the ombudsman team; and whenever I tried to make contact with the ombudsman allocated case worker, there was no response. Only for the case to be ruled on the basis that I didn't provide sufficient evidence, a point which was never raised on any of my email queries nor calls. Since information gathering on part of ombadsman to insurer was a process of more than a singular interaction. Why wasn't afforded more than the singular opportunity. I ask that the plane field be levelled for the consumer to achieve impartiality from the part of the ombudsman. My case was not investigated on equal footing at all.
Regards
Ref is M2446/19. Throughout the 6+ months period, the insurance company was given more than one opportunity to engage the ombudsman team; and whenever I tried to make contact with the ombudsman allocated case worker, there was no response. Only for the case to be ruled on the basis that I didn't provide sufficient evidence, a point which was never raised on any of my email queries nor calls. Since information gathering on part of ombadsman to insurer was a process of more than a singular interaction. Why wasn't afforded more than the singular opportunity. I ask that the plane field be levelled for the consumer to achieve impartiality from the part of the ombudsman. My case was not investigated on equal footing at all.
Regards