T
Techsured
Verified Business
T
AI Review Summary
Based on recent customer reviews, Techsured receives overwhelmingly negative feedback centered on claims processing failures. Customers consistently report claims being delayed for weeks or months, declined on technicalities such as "no force" involved in device loss, or ignored entirely. Poor communication is a recurring frustration, with unanswered emails, unreturned callbacks, and dismissive agents. Several reviewers raise concerns about policy transparency, noting that key exclusions, waiting periods, and excess structures were not clearly disclosed at the point of sale. Unauthorized or unexpected debit order deductions after cancellation further erode trust.
Performance(last 12 months):
0Trustindex Rating
#49Ranked In Insurance
739h 34mReply Time
-90 NPSUnlikely
Replied to 93% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 739 hours 34 min
TrustIndex
0
Ranking
#49
in Insurance
Avg Reply
739h 34m
NPS Score
-90
Recommended: Unlikely
Replied to 93% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 739 hours 34 min
Review Distribution
1|40 Reviews
May '25 - Apr '26
5(0%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(100%)
5(0%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(100%)
Frequently Asked Questions About Techsured
Based on recent customer reviews, Techsured receives overwhelmingly negative feedback centered on claims processing failures. Customers consistently report claims being delayed for weeks or months, declined on technicalities such as "no force" involved in device loss, or ignored entirely. Poor communication is a recurring frustration, with unanswered emails, unreturned callbacks, and dismissive agents. Several reviewers raise concerns about policy transparency, noting that key exclusions, waiting periods, and excess structures were not clearly disclosed at the point of sale. Unauthorized or unexpected debit order deductions after cancellation further erode trust.
Techsured has a TrustIndex of 0 out of 10 on Hellopeter, based on 40 reviews in the last 12 months. They reply to 93% of negative reviews, typically within 739 hours 34 min. Hellopeter has tracked Techsured across 152 total reviews. How is the TrustIndex calculated? →
Recent reviews (40)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceTB
Tjaart B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Mar 2026, 11:10
Innacurate insurance information
Good day I've almost had a insurance contract with your company for nearly a year. I have a blue label connect cellphone contract which you are the insurer off. Upon the phone call leading to your company being the insurer of the mobile device you mentioned what you covered and what you do not cover.... And as far as I know you do cover repairable damage... So a broken charging unit and a cracked screen is repairable.... Yet now my phone has been taken to be fixed and now I'm being falsy quoted on a device I didn't even send in.... And also the quote states that the entire device needs replacing as there is unrepairable damage done to the phone.... Nonsense the phone is still working 100% it just couldn't charge anymore, please explain how that is unrepairable??? Please get your facts and details correct with blue label connect fix my phone and return it.... Or I will stop paying the insurance. Thank you kindly
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)TB
Tjaart B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Mar 2026, 11:10
Innacurate insurance information
Good day I've almost had a insurance contract with your company for nearly a year. I have a blue label connect cellphone contract which you are the insurer off. Upon the phone call leading to your company being the insurer of the mobile device you mentioned what you covered and what you do not cover.... And as far as I know you do cover repairable damage... So a broken charging unit and a cracked screen is repairable.... Yet now my phone has been taken to be fixed and now I'm being falsy quoted on a device I didn't even send in.... And also the quote states that the entire device needs replacing as there is unrepairable damage done to the phone.... Nonsense the phone is still working 100% it just couldn't charge anymore, please explain how that is unrepairable??? Please get your facts and details correct with blue label connect fix my phone and return it.... Or I will stop paying the insurance. Thank you kindly
0
Replies (0)OL
Obed L
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
3 Mar 2026, 07:49
Bad service
Submitted my cellphone insurance claim on 24th February.No call,communication up to 03 March.Upon calling told claim only given to assessor 2 days later..Requested a call back from supervisor.None came.How do we wait 7 days for a decision?.held on for longer than 10 minutes to get through on their call centre
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)OL
Obed L
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
3 Mar 2026, 07:49
Bad service
Submitted my cellphone insurance claim on 24th February.No call,communication up to 03 March.Upon calling told claim only given to assessor 2 days later..Requested a call back from supervisor.None came.How do we wait 7 days for a decision?.held on for longer than 10 minutes to get through on their call centre
0
Replies (0)MM
Malesela M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
27 Feb 2026, 17:09
Hidden Excesses, Strict Forfeiture & Broad Clauses – Is This Device Insurance Designed to Pay Out
I am lodging this public warning after carefully analysing my device insurance policy administered by Viva Cover (Pty) Ltd (trading as Techsured) and underwritten by Guardrisk Insurance Company Limited. Having reviewed the policy wording against the FAIS Act, Policyholder Protection Rules (PPRs), and Treating Customers Fairly (TCF) principles, I have serious concerns about transparency, proportionality, and fairness of certain provisions. 1. Excess Structure – Potentially Misleading Cost-to-Benefit Ratio The policy imposes: 25% excess on all claims Additional 15% excess if claim occurs within 60 days This results in a 40% deduction from claim value for early claims. In practical terms, this significantly erodes the indemnity principle. For lower-value devices, the payout after excess may be disproportionately small relative to premiums paid. The material financial impact of this excess structure is not prominently disclosed in a way that aligns with TCF Outcome 3 (clear information before, during and after point of sale). 2. Absolute 30-Day Forfeiture Clause The policy states that failure to: Report within 30 days, OR Submit documents within 30 days results in automatic forfeiture of benefits. This is an extremely strict condition precedent to liability. Under the Policyholder Protection Rules, terms must not be unreasonable, unjust, or unfair. An automatic and absolute forfeiture without consideration of prejudice to the insurer raises proportionality concerns. 3. Broad Discretionary Powers The insurer reserves sole discretion to: Determine whether repair, replacement, or cash settlement applies Determine “market value” Determine whether risk is “unacceptable” Decide if precautions were sufficient The “Unacceptable Risk” clause is particularly concerning, as it allows subjective assessment based on “past claims experience” without objective thresholds. This creates a material imbalance in rights and obligations between insurer and policyholder. 4. Overly Broad “Reasonable Precautions” & Safeguarding Clauses The policy requires the device to: Not be left in a public place Be safeguarded at all times Be locked away when not in use These clauses are so broadly drafted that almost any theft scenario could potentially be challenged. In practice, this may allow repudiation based on interpretation rather than actual negligence. 5. Mysterious Loss Exclusion – Evidentiary Burden on Insured The exclusion of “mysterious or unexplained loss” places a heavy burden on the insured to prove detailed circumstances of theft. In real-world ******* scenarios, victims may not be able to provide precise details. This exclusion can operate harshly against genuine claimants. 6. Average Clause & Underinsurance Risk The inclusion of an average clause means that if the insured value is less than replacement cost, the insured must carry part of the loss. Many consumers purchasing low-premium device insurance are unlikely to understand the implications of average. 7. Commission & Binder Fee Structure The schedule reflects: 20% commission 9% binder fee Nearly 29% of the premium goes to distribution and administration before risk cost. Consumers should question how much of their premium actually funds risk versus intermediary compensation. Regulatory Considerations Under FAIS and TCF: Material terms must be disclosed clearly and prominently. Products must be appropriate for target market. Claims processes must not create unreasonable post-sale barriers. Terms must not create unfair contractual imbalance. The cumulative effect of: High excess, Strict forfeiture, Broad discretionary clauses, Extensive exclusions, raises legitimate questions regarding alignment with TCF Outcomes 1, 3, and 6. Advice to Consumers Before taking this policy: Request full policy wording in advance. Calculate real payout after excess. Ask how “market value” is determined. Ask for written confirmation of documentation deadlines. Understand the impact of early claims. Low premiums can be attractive, but the true test of insurance is how it performs at claim stage. Consumers should approach with caution and fully interrogate the fine print. If unresolved disputes arise, consumers may escalate to: National Financial Ombud Office of the FAIS Ombud Transparency and fairness are not optional in financial services — they are regulatory obligations.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)MM
Malesela M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
27 Feb 2026, 17:09
Hidden Excesses, Strict Forfeiture & Broad Clauses – Is This Device Insurance Designed to Pay Out
I am lodging this public warning after carefully analysing my device insurance policy administered by Viva Cover (Pty) Ltd (trading as Techsured) and underwritten by Guardrisk Insurance Company Limited. Having reviewed the policy wording against the FAIS Act, Policyholder Protection Rules (PPRs), and Treating Customers Fairly (TCF) principles, I have serious concerns about transparency, proportionality, and fairness of certain provisions. 1. Excess Structure – Potentially Misleading Cost-to-Benefit Ratio The policy imposes: 25% excess on all claims Additional 15% excess if claim occurs within 60 days This results in a 40% deduction from claim value for early claims. In practical terms, this significantly erodes the indemnity principle. For lower-value devices, the payout after excess may be disproportionately small relative to premiums paid. The material financial impact of this excess structure is not prominently disclosed in a way that aligns with TCF Outcome 3 (clear information before, during and after point of sale). 2. Absolute 30-Day Forfeiture Clause The policy states that failure to: Report within 30 days, OR Submit documents within 30 days results in automatic forfeiture of benefits. This is an extremely strict condition precedent to liability. Under the Policyholder Protection Rules, terms must not be unreasonable, unjust, or unfair. An automatic and absolute forfeiture without consideration of prejudice to the insurer raises proportionality concerns. 3. Broad Discretionary Powers The insurer reserves sole discretion to: Determine whether repair, replacement, or cash settlement applies Determine “market value” Determine whether risk is “unacceptable” Decide if precautions were sufficient The “Unacceptable Risk” clause is particularly concerning, as it allows subjective assessment based on “past claims experience” without objective thresholds. This creates a material imbalance in rights and obligations between insurer and policyholder. 4. Overly Broad “Reasonable Precautions” & Safeguarding Clauses The policy requires the device to: Not be left in a public place Be safeguarded at all times Be locked away when not in use These clauses are so broadly drafted that almost any theft scenario could potentially be challenged. In practice, this may allow repudiation based on interpretation rather than actual negligence. 5. Mysterious Loss Exclusion – Evidentiary Burden on Insured The exclusion of “mysterious or unexplained loss” places a heavy burden on the insured to prove detailed circumstances of theft. In real-world ******* scenarios, victims may not be able to provide precise details. This exclusion can operate harshly against genuine claimants. 6. Average Clause & Underinsurance Risk The inclusion of an average clause means that if the insured value is less than replacement cost, the insured must carry part of the loss. Many consumers purchasing low-premium device insurance are unlikely to understand the implications of average. 7. Commission & Binder Fee Structure The schedule reflects: 20% commission 9% binder fee Nearly 29% of the premium goes to distribution and administration before risk cost. Consumers should question how much of their premium actually funds risk versus intermediary compensation. Regulatory Considerations Under FAIS and TCF: Material terms must be disclosed clearly and prominently. Products must be appropriate for target market. Claims processes must not create unreasonable post-sale barriers. Terms must not create unfair contractual imbalance. The cumulative effect of: High excess, Strict forfeiture, Broad discretionary clauses, Extensive exclusions, raises legitimate questions regarding alignment with TCF Outcomes 1, 3, and 6. Advice to Consumers Before taking this policy: Request full policy wording in advance. Calculate real payout after excess. Ask how “market value” is determined. Ask for written confirmation of documentation deadlines. Understand the impact of early claims. Low premiums can be attractive, but the true test of insurance is how it performs at claim stage. Consumers should approach with caution and fully interrogate the fine print. If unresolved disputes arise, consumers may escalate to: National Financial Ombud Office of the FAIS Ombud Transparency and fairness are not optional in financial services — they are regulatory obligations.
0
Replies (0)T
Terry
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
24 Feb 2026, 06:01
I dont understand why tecsure did not deduct their money on the 13 February 2026
I dont understand why tecsure did not deduct their money on the 13 February 2026. Now they want to deduct when I have no money in my account.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)TN
Thembeni N
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
16 Feb 2026, 08:36
Techsured
I put through a claim for a cracked screen, submitted all requested documents. My claim was closed and 2 1/2 months later of going back and forth sending email after email and nothing. Today I was asked to send a motivation for my claim to be re-opened when I sent the motivation 13 days ago. I am so deflated.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)TN
Thembeni N
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
16 Feb 2026, 08:36
Techsured
I put through a claim for a cracked screen, submitted all requested documents. My claim was closed and 2 1/2 months later of going back and forth sending email after email and nothing. Today I was asked to send a motivation for my claim to be re-opened when I sent the motivation 13 days ago. I am so deflated.
0
Replies (0)TH
LM
Lebogang M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Jan 2026, 11:05
***** Insurance
I I have been ****med by Techsure. Been trying to reach them for weeks without success after logging a claim with them in December, they are not responding to emails and their phones are not allowing you to speak to a consultant now
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)LM
Lebogang M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Jan 2026, 11:05
***** Insurance
I I have been ****med by Techsure. Been trying to reach them for weeks without success after logging a claim with them in December, they are not responding to emails and their phones are not allowing you to speak to a consultant now
0
Replies (0)VR
Vishal R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Jan 2026, 11:33
Utter disgusted
I am writing to formally express my frustration and disappointment with TechSure regarding my home and device insurance policy. I took out home and device insurance with TechSure in 2023. At the time of taking out the policy, I specifically discussed coverage for my laptop with your consultant. I was clearly assured by the consultant that my laptop was covered under the home and device insurance. At no point was I informed that laptops were excluded from the policy. Now, after being insured for some time, I am being told that my laptop is not covered. This directly contradicts the information that was provided to me when I agreed to the policy. Had I been informed at the outset that my laptop was not covered, I would have reconsidered or made alternative arrangements. I find this situation extremely disappointing, as it reflects a serious lack of transparency and has caused unnecessary frustration. I re**** on the information given by your consultant in good faith when taking out this insurance.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)VR
Vishal R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Jan 2026, 11:33
Utter disgusted
I am writing to formally express my frustration and disappointment with TechSure regarding my home and device insurance policy. I took out home and device insurance with TechSure in 2023. At the time of taking out the policy, I specifically discussed coverage for my laptop with your consultant. I was clearly assured by the consultant that my laptop was covered under the home and device insurance. At no point was I informed that laptops were excluded from the policy. Now, after being insured for some time, I am being told that my laptop is not covered. This directly contradicts the information that was provided to me when I agreed to the policy. Had I been informed at the outset that my laptop was not covered, I would have reconsidered or made alternative arrangements. I find this situation extremely disappointing, as it reflects a serious lack of transparency and has caused unnecessary frustration. I re**** on the information given by your consultant in good faith when taking out this insurance.
0
Replies (0)