CE
Clint E
Active since Mar 2017
2
Reviews
0
Industries
Reviews
2 reviews102 months ago
So called Experts of accidents and recovering Information from BMW.
Waidler where contracted by Outsurance to recover electronically saved information from my BMW 435 convertable. Due to their report my claim was rejected for FRAUD and Reckless driving. Waidler claimed in their report that my accident did not happen 2 Oct as was reported but a day or 2 earlier and that i was travelling at 195 km/h and did not engage the cars brakes. I have allreadey proved thew wrong as after disputing the claim, Outsurance has now withdrawn the FRAUD claim but are rejecting it on the speed. I proved WAIDLER were wrong about the date and have proof their claim about the speed is also wrong. A car weighing 1740 kg, driving at 195 km/h and no drakes were engaged(as per their report), the car hit nothing and eneded up in a flat veld. How far would it take to come to a stand still? I had a engenier work it out. Its over 1km. The car was 15 to 30 m into a veld, never rolled or hit anything. The braking distance on tar would have been further driving at 195 km/h. I prooved to Otsurance they got the date wrong (CCTV) I will prove they got the speed wrong !
0 replies
102 months ago
Claim Rejected
I had an accident on 2 October 2017. I hit my head and have no memory of the accident. Only my car was involved. On 14 November my claim was rejected for Fraud and diving to fast. When i heard they wanted to reject the claim i requested time to prove i was been honest, that was 9 Nov. I told the person phoning that WAIDLERS report was rubbish. He theatened that if i use that language again he would put the phone down. I told him the report is rubish, he put the phone down in my ear. I was friendly and never used any bad language. The 10 November Pierre vd Linde phoned and said they would be rejecting my claim due to Fraud as the accident did not happen the 2 October he further said i was traveling at 195km/h. When he phoned i had allready started emailing him proof that i did not lie as i had obtained CCTV footage rom ENGEN garage. The 14 i received an email stating my claim was rejected for Fraud and Dishonesty and Take reasonable, necessary steps to prevent or minimise loss, damage, injury or liability. I disputed it the same day. I requested the two police officers names and Bheki,s cell no who where at the accident sight. I have requested the WAIDLER report (WAIDLER (pty) i have allready complained about on your sight), the Vodacom billings and Beacons report. Till today i have not received any thing from Outsurance except Friday 1 December Eddy (Their manager) called to tell me they going to reject my dispute due to the speed. I asked if they at their meeting had read my email i had sent the day before that mathematically prooves that i could not have been travelling 195km/h. He was not interested. WAIDLER i had prooved got the date wrong as they said it happened a day or two before and Outsurance accepted this but are still using WAIDLERS report to reject my claim. Waidler claims i was traveling at 195 km/h and did not engage my brakes when driving straight through a T Junction. I have three affidavits that state my car was 15 to 30 m into the veld and the one tow in person says i was driving slowly and his father that i could not have been driving that speed as the car should have been much further into the veld. When i spoke to the ****her he said the car should be 500m or more into the veld driving at that speed. I told outsirance that a car weighing 1740kg, driving at 195 km/h and not engaging brakes could never end up 15 to 30m into the veld. I sent photos of the area, the road and how a person on Facebook (Engenier) had worked out that the car should have been (Think it is just under or over 2 km into the veld. The car did not hit for eg a wall as the damage is not bad infront. The car did not roll either. Outsurance dont care as now i have to take this matter to the Ombadsman . I am waiting for the letter rececting my dispute and WAIDLERS report, Vodacoms report and all the recorded conversations regarding this claim. Will be asking for WAIDLERS recorded conversation explaining how they got the date wrong but the speed is right. Apparently as explained to me, if i had disconnected the battery for 4 hours anything from 1 too 2 hours memory would be lost from the BMW,s electonic box(not sure of the name). I spoke to BMW about WAIDLERS claim and said they had never head of it. I prooved they wrong about the date and gave affidavits and mathematical proof that i was not doing 195 km/h. They conveniently are using WAIDLERS report not to pay out, yet they withdrew the FRAUD claim. It is redicoules. The maneger at outsurance who called is Eddy, he is Warren van Wyk and Pierre vd Lindes boss.
105 replies
Review Distribution
5 Star
0 (0%)
4 Star
0 (0%)
3 Star
0 (0%)
2 Star
0 (0%)
1 Star
2 (100%)