Active since Sep 2018
I Submitted an Insurance claim for a device that was stolen from my Dads home, whilst we were visiting by an unknow person who gained access to the property whilst we were having lunch. MTN Insurance has taken two weeks to respond with a letter from Guardrisk stating: "Your claim is repudiated for the following reason(s) It is required that as the custodian of the device and the policy holder that you must always do what you can to prevent any loss or damage to occur. The policy does not cover and loss or theft of a device if it occurs while the device was being charged and was unattended. Unfortunately the policy does not cover any loss of a device or damage thereto, from your home or office etc. unless there is evidence of forceful or violent entry into the building. A claim can only be evaluated within the framework of the insurance policy, which is the agreement between you and the insurer. As such, the decision to decline your claim is based on the terms and conditions of your policy after applying principles of fairness and equity.
On the 26 July 2018 during my stay at Gold Rush Morula, I arrived at my vehicle just before 07:00 to find that the front of my vehicle was bumped and the front bumper damaged. Upon investigation and over a month later the letter received from the management of Gold Rush Morula is that are not will to pay for the damages to my vehicle as they are using their disclaimer as their reason. My point is that if their security personnel had acted timeously when the incident occurred and contacted me in my room, added to this if their surveillance cameras covering the area was operational my claim who be with the person that bummed me. As a result of their negligence and lack of adequate operational surveillance I nor the police are able to trace there person that bumped my vehicle and I now look to Gold Rush Morula to cover the cost in lieu of lack of service delivery by their security company and lack of adequate operational surveillance cameras.