Defective Workmanship (you are covered for half a mil Sir as requested. But unfortunately, not on your premises)

I see that defective workmanship claims are rejected for not only me. And they all seem to be based on the same Techincality.

I have had excactly the same experience. Most everything building wise is covered by my landlord. My clients posessions i.e. vehicles are a major concern. This is why I got Cover of R550 000.00 for defective workmanship and miscellaneous Custpomer Goods.

I was also told that the vehicle was still on the premesis when the part in question got damaged. Technicality to get out of paying a claim. If I let the client drive up the road and report it from there. "would they have paid"? This is a joke. T&C apply.

In reality we are not covered for our clients vehicles on our premesis. yet we are not covered off our premesis unless we take cover for driving clients cars around for deliveries etc. We do not drive our clients cars. We are not covered ini our building. What is the use.

This is the poorest excuse I have ver heard. I shall do my bit regarding the ombudsmand and complaints etc. Be aware. All that glitters is not gold. I have also refered some people there. I need to make it public that I have made a mistake. I will not be the only client leaving them as a client after this.

I also inspected my policy schedule. I'm yet to find the excerpt that was quoted by the assessor stating that claims on defective workmanship will only be valid if reported on a vehicle that already left the workshop.

To top it all off. After submitting my claim a new document was sent to me with terms and conditions that have been updated very conveniently.

What rubish.