Complete lack of transparency

I submitted a claim for damages last year when there was an extremely severe hail storm. SA homeloans rejected part of the claim relating to the thatch roof. For the rest of the claim they have not provided a breakdown of how they arrived at those costs and not given any details of what needs to be done, so we don't know what would be sufficient and if the amount they have offered is reasonable. We have to send pictures of the repairs to be covered for future claims . This is blatantly *********, because for all we know their assessors identified a lot more and estimated higher costs but they chose to exclude it. we are not in contruction, we dont have the expertise to assess or fix this or determine a fair cost. We were told their contractors would fix it ( which would ensure that the estimated costs were appropriate and the repairs were done to their required standards) this hasnt happened. I can only assume its because the settlement is not sufficient. We requested details and were told to hire our own assessor. This lack of transparency suggests there is something to hide.

Regarding the thatch, they stated the following reasons: * sways cut - this is utterly dishonest, the sways in question clearly broke, which makes sense if you have a dense layer of ice accumulated on the roof, I sent pictures of this and received no comment. * rust on the wires - of the dozens of meters now exposed, only one tiny section less than a meter has rust and, frankly, that's probably because they have taken four months (three assessors sent and endless reviews) to assess the damage, and it has been a hot and rainy summer I've sent pictures of this. * a tree in the garden keeps the roof in shade - the tree is about three meters from the house and the roof gets a lot of sun in the afternoon. I sent pictures of this. Since when does having trees invalidate insurance claims? Sa homeloans assessed the value of the house and didn't raise this as a risk, which is also ********* - as though they were just accumulating excuses for future use, rather than helping us manage risks.

We pay a fortune for insurance because of the thatch, and now they are basically accusing us of damaging the roof, and saying having a tree in your garden invalidates claims, I don't see this in the insurance contract.

Utterly disgusting behavior, stay away from them. If you have insurance with them, get out before you find your roof collapsing under the weight of their disinterest.

In light of the above, The fact that they valued the house for insurance at more than double what we paid now seems troubling as well.