Inconsistent and Contradictory Information

<p>I claimed for a windscreen damage from my Accident Contribution Benefit. On the day I discovered my windscreen had cracked I immediately called PMD for a claim; the consultant asked me if I have a Windscreen Insurance, I told him that I have never heard of that & it has never been sold to me. When this insurance was sold to me I was told of the Accident Contribution Benefit which accumulates every month & it covers if the car is damaged but is not written off. The consultant who sold me this policy even made an example of this Accident Contribution Benefit cover being able to cover my car in the event of minor damages & maybe I come out of the mall & I discover that my car has been scratched by trolley.</p> <p> </p> <p>Yesterday I was telephonically told that my claim was repudiated because the windscreen damage happened while my car was parked & it did not occur as a result of an accident & no other motor vehicle was involved when my windscreen got damaged. </p> <p> </p> <p>Today I get an email stating that my claim was invalid from the Prime Motor Thrift because “the assessed cost of repairs does not exceed eighty percent (80%) of the current Trade Value of the Insured Vehicle”. I fully understand that the PMT covers in the event of the car being ******/ hijacked, 3rd party damage or written off. Now I don’t understand why my windscreen damage would be claimed from the PMT instead of the ACB.</p> <p> </p> <p>So many people warned so many times about PMD but I never listened. I suspected that my claim wouldn’t be approved because insurers like you will look for any excuse not to pay a claim however I am just appalled by your contradictory stories.</p>