Standard bank insurance: What happens when a business model forces clients to lie?

Part 1: my first experience in 2017: Claim to SB insurance for a gate motor that had stopped working. My gate motor stopped working. I lodged a claim. An assessor was sent out. The assessor was also the potential service provider/repairer. He could not repair the gate motor. I contacted another gate motor repair company. They suggested a replacement. Both companies were not capacitated to conduct repairs – according to them it is not financially feasible to do repairs on gate motors, it is better to replace them. I was informed by the second company that the only way to get insurance to pay for a gate motor was to “have it removed and throw it away – and claim that it was ******”. Call me superstitious – but I could not bring myself to incur the wrath of negative energy – so I did not. Instead, I withdrew my claim. A week later, my husband located another provider, who successfully repaired the electronics on the motor. It has been operating successfully since then. Statistics supposedly show an increase in the theft of gate motors (miraculously achieved by ******* even though there are no further signs of intrusion on electric fences and spiked palisades). Gate motor sales continue to rise. Gate motor thefts are supposedly the main reason. Gate motor repair companies rely on insurance companies to keep their small businesses afloat through keeping them busy with “repairs” that have no value to the end client. Clients are left with no actual solutions to their problems and increasing premiums as a result of claims which are in fact both ineffective and inefficient.

Part 2: my second experience in 2017: Claim to SB insurance for damages to property caused by hail storm. A hail storm resulted in the following damages: a broken window, broken external plumbing piping, plaster on wall being chipped, flat roof on a room leaking. A claim was lodged. An assessor was sent out. The assessor was also the potential service provider/repairer. The feedback given by the assessor was that the claim would be processed as he could see that the roof in particular had been regularly maintained; thus, current damage was likely the result of the hail storm. More than a week passed and no further communication was received from the insurer or the assessor/repairer. Upon contacting the assessor/repairer, they conducted a second visit bringing along the report, which listed what they proposed to repair. The list included repairs to the window and internal painting of the room. No mention is made on the list regarding the roof. As it turns out, this repair company only specialises in repairs which do not include roof damage. Their explanation being that repairs to roofs, including waterproofing of roofs, will only hold 6 months to 1-year guarantees. Therefore, according to their representative, they will not want to be held responsible should the roof subsequently undergo damages again. My concern with this approach remains: How does internal aesthetic repairs to the room solve my actual problem, which was the basis of the claim? I continue to await their response. At this point I am again left with no option other than to withdraw my claim. I also enquired of the repairer whether they are registered with the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC), and was told that they are not as that is not the kind of repairs they would do. Which brings me to wondering why would SB insurance have them listed as a service provider? Does SB insurance by implication assume that all its clients will not ever be able to claim on matters regarding structural damage? A final point of concern, also raised by previous complainants on the Hello Peter site, is that this service provider has brought into question the fact that we have maintained our roof structure. In December 2016 we brought in a contractor to waterproof the entire roof, ensuring that each nail in the structure was securely waterproofed. According to the assessor/repairer; this is a problem in terms of the claim, as maintenance of a roof could suggest prior problems. This was certainly not the case: We’re damned if we conduct maintenance and we’re damned if we don’t.

PS: As I write this I have tried endlessly on numerous calls to reach Standard Bank Home Insurance, 10 min. later – no answer to line. I’ve also contacted the Complaints Dep where Mbali assured me that they would capture my complaint and forward it to Insurance division who would respond with 1-10 days. I chose not to bother. Guess all that’s left is praying to God to not send rain. Ooops – there’s a storm on its way as I post this.