OC
Oxford Claims Services (OCLS)
Unclaimed Business
OC
Oxford Claims Services (OCLS)
Unclaimed Business
0 Reviews (last 12 months)
Does not respond to reviews
Performance(last 12 months):
TrustIndex
0
Ranking
#10
in Business & Legal Services
NPS Score
0
Recommended: Unlikely
Recent reviews (0)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceCB
Carlo B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
24 May 2021, 11:04
UNPROFESSIONAL, INCOMPETENT, INEPT, UNACCEPTABLE
They represent Princeton Group [ Princeton Security ] Reading the other reviews the common thread is that they appear to use delay tactics to avoid any liability on 3rd party claims. This appears to be common practice as well as their modus operandi when dealing with client claims. There appears to be the same "cut & paste" responses to all queries [ from what I have noted & encountered in my own experience ]. Please see below my email correspondence with them : Good Day Please, advise again how you came to your outcome. This process has been dragged out by yourselves for over a month now. You have deliberately attempted to avoid any liability in this matter at every turn & have reverted back with three different outcomes during this period. Your first feedback - 1st May 2021 2.1 Our insured driver was not the cause of the collision . It is our instruction that the collision was caused by; 2.1.1 You as you collided into insured vehicle as you moved into the turn off lane., that the incident happened on Your second feedback - 5th May 2021 from Nombulelo Please note that we have relooked at the claim and are liable for your vehicle damages. Your third feedback - 12 May 2021 2.1 You should have kept a proper lookout, but failed to do so and also failed to take the necessary evasive action to avoid an accident The third feedback is also inaccurate as the Princeton vehicle came across the three oncoming lanes from behind a taxi. I did take evasive action, I braked & turned to the left but the Princeton vehicle did not brake at all & proceeded to collide with my vehicle & there was no chance of avoidance from my side. The Princeton vehicle, again, did not have right of way. The Princeton driver did not keep a proper lookout for oncoming traffic. Please advise how you can come to the conclusion & apportion any blame to myself as I have right of way in this incident & the Princeton vehicle & driver did not adhere to the rules of the road or observe when crossing over the 3 lanes of traffic ? It is noted that you have changed the outcome in this regard [ in your responses ] on 3 occasions to suit your narrative & avoid full liability. This process has dragged on for far too long at our inconvenience. The outcomes have been totally inacurate, unprofessional & unacceptable. Please advise to whom we can escalate this matter as the handling, up until this point, has been incompetent & inept. AND ANOTHER MAIL I SENT 2 DAYS LATER - & still no response : Good Day Please do so because I have noted that the case law you are applying is also flawed & not relevant to the present matter. 4. In support of our assessment of the above apportionment of liability we refer to the following case law which is relevant to the facts of the present matter: RIGHT TURN – AGAINST DRIVER TURNING RIGHT The majority of cases are of the view that the driver turning right needs to ensure that the following traffic has observed and responded to his signal to turn right (see Brown vs Santam 1979 4 SA 370 W, Potgieter vs AEG Telefunkun 1977 4 SA 3 O, James vs Fletcher 1973 1 SA 687 RA, Boots Co vs Somerset West Municipality 1993 SA 216 (C)). Please note that I am not the following trafic [ i was the oncoming vehicle ]& the video provided also shows that the driver of the Ford did not observe or signal to turn right. These guys are a sham & do Renasa's dirty work. They should be ashamed of themselves. No Feedback from - Nombulelo Ndlovu, Eva Goremusandu, Vanessa Kgase
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)CB
Carlo B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
24 May 2021, 11:04
UNPROFESSIONAL, INCOMPETENT, INEPT, UNACCEPTABLE
They represent Princeton Group [ Princeton Security ] Reading the other reviews the common thread is that they appear to use delay tactics to avoid any liability on 3rd party claims. This appears to be common practice as well as their modus operandi when dealing with client claims. There appears to be the same "cut & paste" responses to all queries [ from what I have noted & encountered in my own experience ]. Please see below my email correspondence with them : Good Day Please, advise again how you came to your outcome. This process has been dragged out by yourselves for over a month now. You have deliberately attempted to avoid any liability in this matter at every turn & have reverted back with three different outcomes during this period. Your first feedback - 1st May 2021 2.1 Our insured driver was not the cause of the collision . It is our instruction that the collision was caused by; 2.1.1 You as you collided into insured vehicle as you moved into the turn off lane., that the incident happened on Your second feedback - 5th May 2021 from Nombulelo Please note that we have relooked at the claim and are liable for your vehicle damages. Your third feedback - 12 May 2021 2.1 You should have kept a proper lookout, but failed to do so and also failed to take the necessary evasive action to avoid an accident The third feedback is also inaccurate as the Princeton vehicle came across the three oncoming lanes from behind a taxi. I did take evasive action, I braked & turned to the left but the Princeton vehicle did not brake at all & proceeded to collide with my vehicle & there was no chance of avoidance from my side. The Princeton vehicle, again, did not have right of way. The Princeton driver did not keep a proper lookout for oncoming traffic. Please advise how you can come to the conclusion & apportion any blame to myself as I have right of way in this incident & the Princeton vehicle & driver did not adhere to the rules of the road or observe when crossing over the 3 lanes of traffic ? It is noted that you have changed the outcome in this regard [ in your responses ] on 3 occasions to suit your narrative & avoid full liability. This process has dragged on for far too long at our inconvenience. The outcomes have been totally inacurate, unprofessional & unacceptable. Please advise to whom we can escalate this matter as the handling, up until this point, has been incompetent & inept. AND ANOTHER MAIL I SENT 2 DAYS LATER - & still no response : Good Day Please do so because I have noted that the case law you are applying is also flawed & not relevant to the present matter. 4. In support of our assessment of the above apportionment of liability we refer to the following case law which is relevant to the facts of the present matter: RIGHT TURN – AGAINST DRIVER TURNING RIGHT The majority of cases are of the view that the driver turning right needs to ensure that the following traffic has observed and responded to his signal to turn right (see Brown vs Santam 1979 4 SA 370 W, Potgieter vs AEG Telefunkun 1977 4 SA 3 O, James vs Fletcher 1973 1 SA 687 RA, Boots Co vs Somerset West Municipality 1993 SA 216 (C)). Please note that I am not the following trafic [ i was the oncoming vehicle ]& the video provided also shows that the driver of the Ford did not observe or signal to turn right. These guys are a sham & do Renasa's dirty work. They should be ashamed of themselves. No Feedback from - Nombulelo Ndlovu, Eva Goremusandu, Vanessa Kgase
0
Replies (0)BS
Bheki S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
1 Feb 2021, 09:56
Mr
I have two vehicles, First one a BMW was knocked by the cash in transit vehicle which never stopped. Reported the accident, called on a disciplinary hearing, the guy resigned as the evidence was overwhelming. The company admitted a liability and sent the claim to their broker whom in turn sent it to this OCLS. Been given a runaround as they ask for the information which does not even concern them. These people feels that they are a law unto themselves. My claim has been with them for 4 months and later sent an AOD where they suggest they will pay me around R12 000 whereas the quotation is clearly for over R42000 from credible car repairers including BMW. Now again, I was unfortunately knocked by the Taxify, the guy is insured with Oaksure, the guy knocked me from the behind on a yield sign, he apologized, the owner came to the scene and admitted, now, again these people are used to fight my honest claim again. Now with my second car, they are requesting the same information that is already in their possession. I just wonder if we can all come together and sign the petition, surely these people will be out of business as they are not trading in Good Faith. It is something else if one is wrong, but to be knocked and taken through the trauma is unacceptable. One also have to look at to who regulates this industry as these people needs to be taken out of business. With my profession and where I am seating, they commit fraud by knocking down the legitimate claims and where the wrong has been determined.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)BS
Bheki S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
1 Feb 2021, 09:56
Mr
I have two vehicles, First one a BMW was knocked by the cash in transit vehicle which never stopped. Reported the accident, called on a disciplinary hearing, the guy resigned as the evidence was overwhelming. The company admitted a liability and sent the claim to their broker whom in turn sent it to this OCLS. Been given a runaround as they ask for the information which does not even concern them. These people feels that they are a law unto themselves. My claim has been with them for 4 months and later sent an AOD where they suggest they will pay me around R12 000 whereas the quotation is clearly for over R42000 from credible car repairers including BMW. Now again, I was unfortunately knocked by the Taxify, the guy is insured with Oaksure, the guy knocked me from the behind on a yield sign, he apologized, the owner came to the scene and admitted, now, again these people are used to fight my honest claim again. Now with my second car, they are requesting the same information that is already in their possession. I just wonder if we can all come together and sign the petition, surely these people will be out of business as they are not trading in Good Faith. It is something else if one is wrong, but to be knocked and taken through the trauma is unacceptable. One also have to look at to who regulates this industry as these people needs to be taken out of business. With my profession and where I am seating, they commit fraud by knocking down the legitimate claims and where the wrong has been determined.
0
Replies (0)jE
jacques E
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Feb 2020, 13:10
oxford claims and legal services ... PATHETIC!!! I see no "services" there
On the 18/12/2019 my vehicle was knocked by one of there clients working at Origin Financial a ms. Maya Friedrich, she admitted fault and crying and extremely sorry (blah blah blah) In January 2020 I submitted all the documentation including sketches, quotes, letters etc. to Origin Financial, their claims handler Karen Horn dealt with it (and here I have to add, she also does not answer emails, you have to keep phoning her to get results) On 4 February 2020 I again ask Karen at Origin Financial what is happening with my claim, wel her response is she doesn’t know I have to phone there legal department which is oxford claims and legal services aka (OCLS) I did exactly that, I phoned these people, first dealt with Shaleen Ncube, she tells me they never received the documentation from Origin Financial, so I recent them. 2 days later she tells me Nombulelo Ndlovu will be dealing with the claim At first Nombulelo advised the claim was sent to her manager for approval, *** … really? Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the claim is legit. The she sends me a mail to say I HAVE TO follow up with her in 5 days I am still following up every blady day, I get nowhere I even get excuses to say the report is with the assessor but he cannot send it to her as there is loadshedding (I am sorry they have loadshedding for days at a time) EXTREMELY PATHETIC SERVICE ON THEIR SIDE !!!!!!! SO, ONLY way forward is to be part of the majority an log a complaint on Hellopeter (It will not pay the claim) but that is why we pay attorneys
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)jE
jacques E
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Feb 2020, 13:10
oxford claims and legal services ... PATHETIC!!! I see no "services" there
On the 18/12/2019 my vehicle was knocked by one of there clients working at Origin Financial a ms. Maya Friedrich, she admitted fault and crying and extremely sorry (blah blah blah) In January 2020 I submitted all the documentation including sketches, quotes, letters etc. to Origin Financial, their claims handler Karen Horn dealt with it (and here I have to add, she also does not answer emails, you have to keep phoning her to get results) On 4 February 2020 I again ask Karen at Origin Financial what is happening with my claim, wel her response is she doesn’t know I have to phone there legal department which is oxford claims and legal services aka (OCLS) I did exactly that, I phoned these people, first dealt with Shaleen Ncube, she tells me they never received the documentation from Origin Financial, so I recent them. 2 days later she tells me Nombulelo Ndlovu will be dealing with the claim At first Nombulelo advised the claim was sent to her manager for approval, *** … really? Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the claim is legit. The she sends me a mail to say I HAVE TO follow up with her in 5 days I am still following up every blady day, I get nowhere I even get excuses to say the report is with the assessor but he cannot send it to her as there is loadshedding (I am sorry they have loadshedding for days at a time) EXTREMELY PATHETIC SERVICE ON THEIR SIDE !!!!!!! SO, ONLY way forward is to be part of the majority an log a complaint on Hellopeter (It will not pay the claim) but that is why we pay attorneys
0
Replies (0)