1 reviews | Active since Dec 2014
PATHETIC SERVICES
I am extremely disappointed with how my claim has been handled by Dotsure / The Unlimited Warranty.
I submitted a claim for a headlight control module failure on my Mercedes-Benz A200. The vehicle was assessed by a professional repairer, and the diagnostic report clearly confirmed that the failure was caused by corrosion on the 12V power feed, which led to poor electrical conduction and ultimately caused the module to fail.
This is not a simple “light bulb” issue, but an electrical fault that resulted in component failure and requires module replacement and coding through the vehicle’s control system.
Despite this, my claim was rejected on the basis that the “part is not listed” in the policy, without properly addressing the actual cause of failure or providing a clear, clause-based explanation.
What is concerning is:
* The assessment appears to focus only on the part name (headlight module), not the electrical fault that caused the failure * No clear policy clause has been provided that specifically excludes this type of electrical failure
As a policyholder, I expect claims to be assessed fairly, based on the actual cause of failure and supported by proper policy interpretation not a blanket rejection.
I have now formally escalated the matter and will proceed to the Ombudsman if necessary.
I would appreciate a proper reassessment of my claim based on the technical findings provided.
Policy Number: TU***-1
We’re sorry you've had a bad experience, and we're grateful you've brought it to our attention. Your feedback means a lot to us - it allows us to make things right. Please note that your review has been sent to the relevant team, and they'll be in touch with you.
We’re sorry you've had a bad experience, and we're grateful you've brought it to our attention. Your feedback means a lot to us - it allows us to make things right. Please note that your review has been sent to the relevant team, and they'll be in touch with you.
I acknowledge receipt; however, the response appears to be generic in nature and does not address the specific concerns raised in my escalation.
I would prefer to receive a detailed written response addressing the merits of the dispute, rather than being contacted telephonically by different consultants, as this makes it difficult to track and properly assess the information provided.
Kindly ensure that all communication regarding this matter is provided in writing and that the response specifically addresses the points raised in my escalation, including the technical findings and policy interpretation.
I remain awaiting a substantive and case-specific response.
I acknowledge receipt; however, the response appears to be generic in nature and does not address the specific concerns raised in my escalation.
I would prefer to receive a detailed written response addressing the merits of the dispute, rather than being contacted telephonically by different consultants, as this makes it difficult to track and properly assess the information provided.
Kindly ensure that all communication regarding this matter is provided in writing and that the response specifically addresses the points raised in my escalation, including the technical findings and policy interpretation.
I remain awaiting a substantive and case-specific response.
Thank you for getting back to us. As explained in the previous response, your review has been shared with the relevant team, who will assist you with the concerns that you've outlined. We have also asked that they provide written communication as you've requested.
Once again, please accept our sincere apologies for the unpleasant experience you've had so far.
Thank you for getting back to us. As explained in the previous response, your review has been shared with the relevant team, who will assist you with the concerns that you've outlined. We have also asked that they provide written communication as you've requested.
Once again, please accept our sincere apologies for the unpleasant experience you've had so far.