ICICI Lombard rejected half my ₹95,000 Mercedes claim because of an old scratch. Is this even legal?
Looking for advice because this has turned into an absolute nightmare.
I own a Mercedes A-Class and have been paying around ₹90,000 every year for comprehensive insurance with ICICI Lombard.
A few days ago I met with an accident. Another car took a sharp left to avoid a biker and hit my driver’s side. While trying to avoid the collision, my car slid into a tree, causing damage to the other side as well.
The total repair estimate is around ₹95,000.
The surveyor approved repairs for one side but rejected the other side, claiming there was an old scratch on that side before the accident.
My question is: Can an insurer deny repairing fresh accident damage just because there was a pre-existing cosmetic scratch on the same panel? The accident clearly caused new dents and paint damage.
To make matters worse, the surveyor was extremely arrogant. When I explained that I maintain my car well and the damage was from the accident, he sarcastically suggested the workshop might have made the scratches. He refused to email me the rejection details or the policy clause he was relying on, saying I’d receive a letter “whenever it comes” and that he had no idea when.
I also received a call from my claim manager, who told me he was calling from the grievance team. Later I found out that wasn’t true.
I’ve already filed a formal grievance, but I’m wondering:
Has anyone successfully challenged a rejection like this?
Is this a common tactic to reduce claim payouts?
Should I escalate directly to the Insurance Ombudsman and IRDAI if the grievance is rejected?
Since I’ve been paying nearly ₹90,000 in annual premiums, this feels incredibly unfair for a ₹95,000 claim.
I’d really appreciate any advice or experiences from people who’ve dealt with similar situations. Thanks.