Active since Jan 2014
Dear Standard Insurance Limited, I am writing to express my profound dissatisfaction and frustration with your decision to decline my home insurance claim SHS/2025/394894. Your decision to deny the claim is, in my view, totally unjustified and unreasonable, and it reflects a severe failure in your duty to act in good faith as my insurer. The justification provided is not only inconsistent with the facts of the case, but also contradicts the policy wording and coverage for which I have paid premiums in good faith. Key Issues: Contradiction of Policy Terms: The rejection seems to selectively interpret the policy language in your favour while overlooking explicit coverage clauses. I request a specific citation of the policy clause you are utilising to deny coverage, as well as an explanation of its logical application to the facts of my case. I have been attempting to reach out to you for the past week or two. However, I haven't received any formal feedback or a clear direction for moving forward. Bad Faith Conduct: Your decision demonstrates a lack of good faith, which could have serious regulatory and legal consequences. Refusing legitimate claims undermines trust in the insurance industry and places policyholders under unnecessary financial strain when they are already struggling. You have focused solely on one aspect of the damage, and your decision was based entirely on that, yet there are other small cracks throughout the room. Regulatory Escalation Preparedness: Unless this matter is reviewed and resolved promptly, I am prepared to escalate this complaint to the Insurance Ombudsman / Financial Services Regulatory Authority and seek legal counsel to pursue the claim, including compensation for damages resulting from this unjust denial. Requested Action: I demand a full re-evaluation of the claim, whereby Standard Bank will send an internal assessor to provide a detailed written explanation, citing specific policy clauses, and a formal written response within seven working days. If I do not receive a satisfactory resolution, I will proceed with filing a formal complaint with the appropriate regulatory authority and explore legal avenues for redress. Regards, Sikelela Sigudhla
Reference is made to CRSE4A6B. You can't respond to my complaint after you have done your investigation because you do not have the factual information. You claim that "We have noted your asset was purchased in November 2023, and your asset-related complaint was only logged in March 2024." Which asset did I buy in November 2023? What was the complaint I logged in March about? Govender, Braiden Joshua, spare me your bile, please!
I would like to bring to VWFS's/WesBank attention that their actions towards me through VW Hatfield Bryanston are *********. Recently, I purchased a car and a house financed by VWFS/WesBank. I traded in my Amarok single cab bakkie for R210k during the process. As per the agreement, the dealership was supposed to settle two of my accounts from the R210k, one with FNB and another with Captitec Bank, and the shortfall from the account would be added to my car finance, which is what has happened. The dealership settled the the Capitec account on time, but there was a delay in the settlement of the FNB credit card account, which resulted in an amount of R4107.65 owed to me by VWFS. I have made several attempts to resolve this matter with VW Hatfield Bryston, but they have not been helpful in resolving the issue and just dismissed me. I am hoping that VWFS will investigate this matter and take appropriate action to rectify the situation. I would like to share with you a recent experience I had with the car dealership. After finalising the deal and taking possession of the car, I was informed that the dealership (VWFS) would not refund me the money. The reason given was that their senior workshop technician had found an issue with the car during the inspection and determined that the spare wheel bracket needed to be replaced. My concern is that this issue was not brought to my attention before the legal documents were signed and the car was handed over to me. I believe the inspection should have been done before all legal documents were finalised, especially from the finance side. This way, any issues could have been addressed beforehand, and the deal could have been adjusted accordingly. As per the legally binding documents, I am requesting a refund of my R4107.65. I kindly appeal to you to assist me in resolving this issue with the dealership. Kind Regards,
"Your FNB Short Term Policy has been amended. The changes made to your policy come into effect immediately. The updated Policy Schedule attached provides you with all the important information regarding your policy." Apparently, this is because of my claim history, and this claim history is your own doing FNB. You spilit claims. Clients do pay premiums, why are we paying premiums yet we get victims on the number of claims one submits. Such information should be upfront, not something you are being told after and being penalised for it and in fine print as well as how many claims one can submit in year because we do not plan these things. This is just pathetic, anyone who is shopping for house insurance, do not consider FNB, what they are doing is pathetic.
Case number 1041104 has a reference. It is pathetic how you deal with cases sometimes, I am the client who has the information at hand of what has transpired as result of the case being lodged, but you rely on what someone "THINKS" is the issue rather than the root cause, and the root cause information is being provided but still you decides to discard that information and rely on what the electrician "THINKS", when someone thinks thinks vs what happen, there some distinction there.
You claim department services suck. A claim has been submitted for a car services/service plan sucks. By 14:55pm the claim hasn't been authorised, the technician has been waiting for authorisation. What do you call this? Is this acceptable taking into account what's need to be done to the car?
I called the billing department with regard to the wrong amount I am being billed. They clearly explained it to me and advised me that I should call the Sales department to sort out my package because if that hasn't been sorted out I would continue receiving the wrong billing amount. I called the Sales department yesterday as well and I have spoken to Sithembiso Innocent Nyidi who told me that the Billing department is talking ****, he never heard of such, it is for the first hearing that, he was just arrogant and unprofessional, I did not like his attitude, it was that "full of himself attitude". His advice was that he made a note to the system which the Billing department would see and that would resolve my issue. I called the Billing department today (27.07.2022), and they told me the same explanation as yesterday, that I should call the Sales department to fix my package, if Sithembiso Innocent Nyidi was a professional Telkom employee, with the skill to listen, I wouldn't be writing this review. So, I am kindly requesting that the Sales department fix my package to the correct one so that I do not get billed the wrong amount because this has happened for the second time now.
Kindly be advise that I am still waiting for a call with respect to this reference number #43700
Can somebody within the ABSA Vehicle Finance Restructuring Department call me since is so very difficult to get hold of them on this number: 011 354 4724. It is about the extended 5 months rather 3 months on my initial term contract.
May I kindly request that the account be also closed on my credit profile, the status of the account should be update as closed, update the information like you would quickly do when clients are defaulting. The account was paid up 20 August 2018.
© Copyright 2026 hellopeter.com and its affiliates. All rights reserved.