Unfair excess charged on inferior geyser installed

Ref number ***.

Earlier this year it took Outsurance 4 months to resolve an alarm system claim. It was taken seriously after logging it on hellopeter.

I'm in the same position once again. I had a Kwikot geyser and about 3 years into the warranty it was replaced by Outsurance with an Ariston geyser. 2 years later the Ariston geyser started leaking. I was told 5 years passed and I need to pay the excess. I was not happy about this but the Outsurance broker assured me that I should pay the access and then resolve it. It's been 4 weeks with little to no response.

Under the CPA, goods supp**** by a service provider must be durable, quality-fit, and free of defects—installing a low-quality replacement that bursts after only 2 years violates basic consumer protection rights.

TCF principles require insurers and their contractors to provide quality work and fair outcomes. Charging an excess to replace a poor-quality geyser selected and installed by Outsurance own contractor unfairly penalises me for the contractor's bad product choice.

I want to understand why did Outsurance not identify that the geyser was replaced with an Ariston 2 years ago and not a Kwikot? I also want to understand why 2 years into the warranty the Ariston geyser started leaking?

I would appreciate a prompt response with my excess fully refunded.