Tracker Connect refusing to provide contract evidence and thus robbing customers!

As already indicated on my email that I saw your missed call and also got no response when I tried calling back.
I must also confirm that I have received the recordings as you promised to send them. Now what is left for your company and I to do is to analyze the content of that recording much included among other things that:
(1) Identification of a wrong company as my insurer, which is supposedly the one that referred your company to call me
that
(2) That I have no tracker on my car, which to the contrary I have been with CarTrack since 22 July 2023 and have a certificate to prove it
(3) The “voice” giving the email address as only my name, which is why I never received the email that is claimed to have been sent to me.
There are others as well. So please contact me soon.

Now that you have finally sent the recording (Thanks to this Hellopeter Review), here are the issues that make it clear why you were reluctant and I had to wait from the 13th August 2024:

(1) Above everything else, the communication flow between the agent and the voice ("me") should have raised a red flag. The time gaps (averaging 10-20 seconds) between questions asked by Precious (the agent that was assisting me) and the voice ("my replies") clearly indicate that there is a problem. In the following points I will be exposing the issues further with precise timelines.

(2) At 00:15 sec at the beginning of the recording, Precious (the agent that was assisting me) makes it clear that they got an instruction from Pineapple-iWise, which is identified as my insurer. Please note that Pineapple is not my insurer and that I have been insured with King Price for my bakkie since 14 July 2023 and even have a positive review for them here on Hellopeter. My only contact with Pineapple was when they asked me to take my car for pre-inspection in order for them to approve me "joining" them BASED ON INFORMATION THEY GOT FROM A "BROKER". We clarified that and hence I was NEVER their client. The so-called broker did the same thing for the same car with MiWay, Discovery and Budget Insurance. All these were apparently going to start at the same date of 01 September 2024. I became aware because of the pre-inspection requests from those companies, hence I managed to inform them that I never joined them. This also was also sorted with them.

(3) At 00:33 sec to 00:54 sec your agent Precious makes it very clear that Tracker was asked by Pineapple "my insurer" to have the device installed on my bakkie, and that THEY (Pineapple) are responsible for the payment of the device. Then when asked if there is a tracker on the car, at 01:04 sec to 01:08 sec the voice ("me") says that I have no tracker on the vehicle. This is incorrect as well as I registered with CarTrack from 22 July 2023. A tracker certificate can easily be provided as proof. Now with Pineapple having been identified as responsible for the payment of the device, why are you even telling me about an amount of R2 600 which on your call to me you indicated that it is because there is a device that you installed on my car?

(4) After describing the different Tracker packages that your company offer, at 02:09 sec your agent asks "the voice" which package must be installed. There was a pause, then "the voice" simply said "okay" at 02:14 sec, which necessitated your agent to ask again about the package of choice at 02:19 sec. The answer from "the voice" at 02:26 sec was simply to say "any tracker will be fine". Again this should have raised a red flag.

(5) At 03:04 sec to 03:10 sec "the voice" the voice gives an email address as only my name and surname and nothing else. Strangely, your agent never asks for clarification of the email address. An email can never be just Vuyo Sigonyela only. This is why I never received any documentation from your company! On your emails you are insisting that documentation on the conditions was sent to me. Unfortunately for you as you can hear clearly on the recording, there is no such email address, and thus no documentation was sent to me.

(6) From 03:25 to 03:35 sec of the recording, the home address provided was first no. 25, and then later on as no. 114.

(7) There is also a conflict of "Previous Home Address" at 04:05 sec where "the voice" indicates the current home address as being the same as the previous one that is on your system, which is based on a vehicle I had in 2003. That is yet another red flag because in 2003 I was down in the Cape and had never set a foot in Gauteng. So those addresses can never be the same!

(8) When your agent asks for the Registration No. of the vehicle at 09:53 sec, "the voice" answers at 09:57 sec requesting her to wait for "him" to check it until "he" answers at 10:10 sec by reading the car's registration number. I mean which driver doesn't know his car's registration number, especially a car they have had for more than a year???

(9) Please also note that where the terms and conditions are read on the recording, the cancellation amount (which you claimed was indicated) IS NOT indicated at 18:10 sec to 20:52 sec.

(10) What is indicated on 22:24 sec of the call about documents that were to be mailed never took place as already indicated on the email address issue above.

Over and above the highlighted problems from the recording, the vehicle year model you have on your system is also incorrect.

So in all, I must reaffirm that you take note of what your agent stated from 00:33 to 00:54 sec as she made it clear that the device is to be paid for by Pineapple as the one that approached Tracker. On my side, I don't have anything from Pineapple that tells of a payment that I would have to make in relation to Tracker as I am not even their client.

I hope to hear from you soon on the way forward is such a situation.

Are you referring to a response which you have also recalled? On my inbox I have your response and then a request to recall the message.

It is clear that you never paid any attention to detail either of my detailed reply here on Hellopeter or on the call itself! All these show that you are indeed a *****ED company which people must be aware of! Be that as it may please note the following:

(1) The communication flow in relation to delayed responses demonstrates the problem between the so-called me (hence I used inverted commas) and your agent. What I am highlighting goes beyond just the delayed responses, it also relates to the content of those responses. This means responses that don't relate to the questions asked where your agent has to ask the same question again.

(2) To show again that you did not pay attention to what I said but only want to say what you want to say, I NEVER SAID I REQUESTING PREAPPROVAL for joining iWise? Can you please indicate where I said I was requesting preapproval for joining i-Wise?
The agent also never mentioned anything in relation to the device and monthly payments. She simply said Pineapple will be paying for the telematics device and that I will not be paying for it! From 00:45 and 00:58 of the recording backs what I am saying! Please indicated where those monthly payments of the device are stated on the recording!
In relation to 01:01: this is exactly part of the reasons I am using inverted commas when it comes to that voice, basically, to say that is not me! If that was me, I would have indicated that I have a tracker! So I highlighted that post in that context!

(3) As indicated that Pineapple was never my insurer, so I don't understand why you are mentioning cancellation of my insurance I never took in the first place.
PLEASE NOTE: With regards to the "section F" and all its subsections that you are referring me to: As indicated before, THESE WERE NEVER SENT TO ME! So referring to me now is pointless. Policy documents are sent BEFORE and NOT AFTER!!!!!
You further state that Tracker and CarTrack are two separate entities: Who said they are the same? Instead, as stated on (2) above, I stated that I have CarTrack was to illustrate that the voice that is said to have said I have no tracker is certainly not mine!
I am finding it strange that you would choose not to respond to the point I made about 02:09 and 02:14 and simply jump to 02:19! The importance of 02:09 and 02:14 is that they are a perfect example of the point about communication flow I have raised in (1) above. I mean when someone is asked to choose which package would be best, a proper answer can never be "okay" as it happened on the recording.

(4) Your willingness to lie to drive a narrative that seeks a person to pay your company raises further alarm. In your email you stated about my email: " You confirmed that you do not recall the email address as she was confirming your details." I NEVER CONFIRMED THAT I DO NOT RECALL THE EMAIL ADDRESS! Can you please provide the time on that recording where I said that? To the contrary, what I said on my previous response was to question what that voice (masqueraded as myself) gave as an email address which was just name and surname!

(5) Again that voice (masqueraded as me) is again exposed by the wrong address provided. So by highlighting the inconsistency on the address, I was red flagging the problem in line with that communication flow. Even the point about vehicle registration is part of the red flagging that voice. So please, don't refer to that voice as myself as I fully know my email address, home address and vehicle registration and wouldn't even need to ask anyone to wait as I will be going to look for them (as it happened on the call before providing the vehicle registration number).

(6) Yes you did claim that the terms and conditions that were read out on the recording did state the amount! Please assist yourself by reading your own emails well before responding. Again showing me such terms now doesn't assist with anything as terms and conditions with all the specifics should be sent in the beginning and not later! Regarding the email with terms and conditions that YOU claim to have sent to me, WHEN DID YOU SEND THAT EMAIL? Do you mean now during this complaint?

Please don't ridicule yourself like this! I will also be emailing this response here to you, but it was necessary that a public platform also sees what I am dealing with here.

Just for an update on the complaint: Instead of responding to the discrepancies raised above, Tracker decided to keep quiet for a week. After that, I received a very arrogant email from another person, Lizelle Le Roux whose signature indicates that she is the Executive: Legal and Company Secretary. She threatened me of legal action and that Tracker will not be entertaining this anymore. To make things even worse, they have now also deducted a Premium of R199 as well as R250.36. I am still waiting for their response on the question I have raised regarding these amounts. People beware of Tracker!