[Technic90]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

I got tired after haggling with Ergo and Toyota for a long time and hence agreed for paying 3 lakhs to get the vehicle back on road. Needed vehicle badly in these COVID times.

I can still go to Insurance ombudsman within 12 months of claim rejection. Seems like a better option. Though I agree I should not have waited so long.

Regarding raising dispute with the bank, payment can not be blocked if I have used the card voluntarily to make the payment to Toyota. Bank is not a party to the warranty/insurance claim. Being a banker myself, I won't file a wrong claim.

You should definitely file a complaint in IRDA and see where it goes. You have nothing to lose now. Get some evidence from Toyota as well on why it can't be a manufacturing or service defect. If you lose the case you can sue Toyota if you have the energy and time for not honouring the warranty.

I was thinking if you had taken Toyota Protect and faced the same issue with the insurer not agreeing then you could have directly sued Toyota because in this case Toyota is responsible for insurance as well since Toyota Protect promises manufacturer support. Either way either through warranty or insurance, Toyota would have been forced to sort it out. So I believe Toyota would have resolved the issue before you even had to go to court.

[Mail.atyagi]

Originally Posted by Technic90

You should definitely file a complaint in IRDA and see where it goes. You have nothing to lose now. Get some evidence from Toyota as well on why it can't be a manufacturing or service defect. If you lose the case you can sue Toyota if you have the energy and time for not honouring the warranty.

I was thinking if you had taken Toyota Protect and faced the same issue with the insurer not agreeing then you could have directly sued Toyota because in this case Toyota is responsible for insurance as well since Toyota Protect promises manufacturer support. Either way either through warranty or insurance, Toyota would have been forced to sort it out. So I believe Toyota would have resolved the issue before you even had to go to court.

Since many members suggested to go for IRDA ombudsman complaint, I did some Google search on and the ombudsman scheme is apparently applicable only on complaints related to personal lines. Does it mean it would not entertain the complaint if vehicle is registered in name of company(my employer) and therefore insurance is also in same name as well as paid for by the company? Any feedback on this will be of much help.

I did not had a choice to select insurer since this is being done by the employer. However, I am now eligible for a new car and will be transferring the Crysta in my name once I finalize the new car. And yes, for subsequent insurance, I will definitely go for Toyota Protect to avoid future hassles.

[SuperFlyBoy]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

...This went on for almost 2.5 months and I had made up my mind to go for legal case against both....

I am still contemplating filing a case against the insurer and waiting for a final closure from their side as someone from their side suggested they were having internal discussions on paying 1/3 of the costs...

I'm also wondering who I can approach (lawyer who knows this type of insurance litigation) for a flood-damaged 2015 4x4 AT Fortuner - where the dealer sold me a normal policy instead of continuing with the RTI policy I had earlier.

Insurer is only offering 15L and will be able to obtain 12L as salvage!

They were acting as an insurance broker, so they are fully responsible in my opinion and I am going to approach the IRDA as well...

[Turbanator]

Well, It will be OP’s word against Toyota, even though OP has mentioned that he has not taken car outside, Toyota can easily shrug this off citing their systems/ manuals and say that workshops are not opening this nut to carry out any maintenance. It appears highly unlikely that the bolt can come loose on its own and this accident incident can be purely coincidence.

Originally Posted by SuperFlyBoy

for a flood-damaged 2015 4x4 AT Fortuner - where the dealer sold me a normal policy instead of continuing with the RTI policy I had earlier.

Insurer is only offering 15L and will be able to obtain 12L as salvage

I am afraid it’s a difficult position for you. Insurance liability is to the extent of IDV which at 15 lac seems to be correct. Am not sure if RTI policy is even available for old cars or not, either way, it’s your duty to check all terms at the time of taking policy.

Have you got the repair estimate from Toyota, it’s not a German car, so even if engine/ transmission are to be replaced these can be well covered under 80-85% of IDV.

[SuperFlyBoy]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Well, It will be OP’s word against Toyota, even though OP has mentioned that he has not taken car outside, Toyota can easily shrug this off citing their systems/ manuals and say that workshops are not opening this nut to carry out any maintenance. It appears highly unlikely that the bolt can come loose on its own and this accident incident can be purely coincidence.



I am afraid it’s a difficult position for you. Insurance liability is to the extent of IDV which at 15 lac seems to be correct. Am not sure if RTI policy is even available for old cars or not, either way, it’s your duty to check all terms at the time of taking policy.

Have you got the repair estimate from Toyota, it’s not a German car, so even if engine/ transmission are to be replaced these can be well covered under 80-85% of IDV.

Thanks Turbanator - not sure if we should continue here or in another thread - will await mods guidance.

I will PM you in the meantime - and thanks!

[ValuableRecluse]

I think this is among the most annoying parts of a vehicle ownership experience, where the manufacturer as well as the insurer refuse to accept full liability after a mechanical failure.
Did you get any warnings on the MID like, 'TRANSMISSION FLUID TEMP HIGH SEE OWNERS MANUAL'?
From the forensic pictures attached, the gouge marks haven't in any way punctured the pan or affected its integrity in anyway.
Neither has the drain plug been loosened enough for a substantial amount of transmission fluid to be lost.
Then where did the fluid leak out from? It is indeed a mystery!
Did Toyota refill ATF to spec and investigate before the pan was removed?
if they did not, they missed a valuable opportunity to get down to the root cause.
Once the fluid was refilled it's possible that the transmission would have run normally, as the fluid was low but there still was 1-2ltr in the pan (capacity 2.4ltr as per the repair manual) when it was dropped, so the AT hadn't run dry.
Of course you may have lost faith in the gearbox and wanted a replacement, that is entirely your choice.

[SuperFlyBoy]

Originally Posted by Indiguy

I second IRDA as step 1. I had a claim denial albeit health related, within 2 weeks of online complaint with IRDA I received an email from the insurance co that they would honour my claim. While I had my doubts about IRDA being able to do anything through an online complaint, I was pleasantly surprised.

Any link for this IRDA complaint page please?

TIA!

[Mail.atyagi]

Originally Posted by ValuableRecluse

I think this is among the most annoying parts of a vehicle ownership experience, where the manufacturer as well as the insurer refuse to accept full liability after a mechanical failure.
Did you get any warnings on the MID like, 'TRANSMISSION FLUID TEMP HIGH SEE OWNERS MANUAL'?
From the forensic pictures attached, the gouge marks haven't in any way punctured the pan or affected its integrity in anyway.
Neither has the drain plug been loosened enough for a substantial amount of transmission fluid to be lost.
Then where did the fluid leak out from? It is indeed a mystery!
Did Toyota refill ATF to spec and investigate before the pan was removed?
if they did not, they missed a valuable opportunity to get down to the root cause.
Once the fluid was refilled it's possible that the transmission would have run normally, as the fluid was low but there still was 1-2ltr in the pan (capacity 2.4ltr as per the repair manual) when it was dropped, so the AT hadn't run dry.
Of course you may have lost faith in the gearbox and wanted a replacement, that is entirely your choice.

Yes! got the MID warning light, pic attached.

The impact didn't puncture the transmission pan else it could have been clearly accepted under insurance claim. Also, as per my understanding the AT transmission oil is approx 7.5 Litre. Haven't verified it from owners manual though.

The dealer refilled the transmission assembly with oil and tested the vehicle but apparently it wasn't working normally. I asked them to give in writing that this is working fine and would be covered under extended warranty (valid till Oct'21) which they couldn't confirm.

And yes, after all this, I also didn't wanted to take any chance with critical components.

[GTsunny]

Originally Posted by SuperFlyBoy

Link for IRDA complaint?

Googled a bit and found these, try calling and emailing, also there may be staff shortage so, they may not end up picking calls and / or replying to emails but, do not give up.

Always keep everything on the record, so emails to the insurance company and to their grievance redressal cell, and to IRDAI are a must, and always ask for a complaint number, whether it’s the insurance company or it’s grievance redressal cell or IRDAI, a complaint number means it has to be checked and resolved, and do not give up.

https://www.policyholder.gov.in/report.aspx#

https://www.irdai.gov.in/ADMINCMS/cm...No225&mid=14.2

https://www.policyholder.gov.in/ombudsman.aspx

https://m.economictimes.com/wealth/i...w/57452692.cms

https://m.economictimes.com/wealth/i...w/45240348.cms

Friends, pl correct if anything incorrect mentioned in this post for process

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by ValuableRecluse

Once the fluid was refilled it's possible that the transmission would have run normally, as the fluid was low but there still was 1-2ltr in the pan (capacity 2.4ltr as per the repair manual) when it was dropped, so the AT hadn't run dry.
Of course you may have lost faith in the gearbox and wanted a replacement, that is entirely your choice.

2.4 litres is the refill quantity for after the pan removal and reinstallation.
So having 1 or 2 litres in the pan does not really tell how much is lost unless the remaining ATF fully drained and measured against the total fill capacity.

Anyway for the benefit of all, from the workshop manual:

[ValuableRecluse]

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

Yes! got the MID warning light, pic attached.

The impact didn't puncture the transmission pan else it could have been clearly accepted under insurance claim. Also, as per my understanding the AT transmission oil is approx 7.5 Litre. Haven't verified it from owners manual though.

The dealer refilled the transmission assembly with oil and tested the vehicle but apparently it wasn't working normally. I asked them to give in writing that this is working fine and would be covered under extended warranty (valid till Oct'21) which they couldn't confirm.

And yes, after all this, I also didn't wanted to take any chance with critical components.

9.5ltrs is the figure given in my Fortuner owners manual which has a similar gearbox (only one alphabet changes in the model number ). The fluid is distributed amongst the torque converter, valve body, pan etc.

If the AT continued to misbehave after receiving fresh ATF you really didn't have a choice but to go ahead with an AT replacement.

Wish you all the best with your your grievance redressal with the IRDA.
Please write about it here so we can all learn from it.

[defactorake]

Its renewal is actually coming up in the first week of May and I think I will skip HDFC ERGO for Acko or digit.


Even my insurance renewal is in the first week of May and I'm thinking to go with Acko this time. My existing insurer, IFFCO Tokio is quoting 15K for my two year old Honda Amaze cvt petrol with an IDV of just under 5 lakhs.

[ValuableRecluse]

Originally Posted by Sankar

2.4 litres is the refill quantity for after the pan removal and reinstallation.
So having 1 or 2 litres in the pan does not really tell how much is lost unless the remaining ATF fully drained and measured against the total fill capacity.

Anyway for the benefit of all, from the workshop manual:
Attachment 2150098

I am in complete agreement!

It's a shame that Toyota didn't do that, or if they did we have no information about it.

Thats the table I wanted to copy and paste here, but I'm too scared of Toyota copyright.

[Mail.atyagi]

Originally Posted by ValuableRecluse

9.5ltrs is the figure given in my Fortuner owners manual which has a similar gearbox (only one alphabet changes in the model number ). The fluid is distributed amongst the torque converter, valve body, pan etc.

If the AT continued to misbehave after receiving fresh ATF you really didn't have a choice but to go ahead with an AT replacement.

Wish you all the best with your your grievance redressal with the IRDA.
Please write about it here so we can all learn from it.

Just checked the repair bill again, Transmission fluid used is 120 units having price of Rs 80.10 per unit. Does it mean 12 Litre??

[Sankar]

Originally Posted by ValuableRecluse

9.5ltrs is the figure given in my Fortuner owners manual which has a similar gearbox (only one alphabet changes in the model number ). The fluid is distributed amongst the torque converter, valve body, pan etc.

Fill capacity is the same for both AC60E and F used on 1/2GDFTV, so it holds good for each other i.e., Innova/Fortuner/Fortuner4x4 Total capacity is 9.5 litres but its not a refill quantity that is mentioned anywhere in the manual.

Originally Posted by Mail.atyagi

Just checked the repair bill again, Transmission fluid used is 120 units having price of Rs 80.10 per unit. Does it mean 12 Litre??

1 unit is 100ml. So 120 units is 12 litres. The excess quantity may be used while in the process of reassembly, refilling, checking and setting the correct level in transmission. The procedure is not as simple or straightforward as an engine oil refill.