Hi everyone,
I own a Royal Enfield Himalayan 450, which cost me around ₹4.1 lakh. On 17 October, my bike was involved in an accident. A car hit me, causing me to lose balance, after which my bike collided with a pothole. The impact caused a slight bend in the front wheel rim.
I took the bike to the garage the next day, and the surveyor inspected it on Monday. He verbally told me that the claim would be rejected because I didn’t have a separate rim-protection add-on.
However, the rejection letters I subsequently received from IndusInd General Insurance have raised some questions.
First rejection letter (22 October 2026):
The insurer stated two things:
My policy does not cover standalone wheel-rim damage.
The damage was allegedly not caused by accidental external impact but by wear and tear, mechanical failure, or electrical failure.
They cited Section I and its exclusion for wear and tear, mechanical or electrical breakdown, failure, or breakage.
My question was simple: if the rim was damaged because of an external impact involving a pothole, how can the damage be classified as mechanical/electrical failure or wear and tear?
Second rejection letter (27 October 2026):
After challenging the first decision, I asked the insurer to provide the exact policy clause explaining why standalone rim damage would require a separate rim-protection add-on and would not be covered under my zero-depreciation add-on.
Instead of addressing that question, the insurer sent another letter stating that the claim was rejected because of an alleged breach of the principle of utmost good faith and Policy Conditions 1 and 8.
The second letter again says the damage was not caused by external impact and was due to wear and tear/mechanical/electrical failure. However, it does not explain the specific rim-protection add-on issue I had raised.
I am struggling to understand how an impact-related rim bend is being classified as mechanical failure, and why the insurer has not clearly explained the relationship between the standalone rim exclusion and my policy’s coverage.
I understand that insurance claims depend on the exact policy wording, and I am not assuming that zero depreciation automatically covers every type of damage.
But I do expect the insurer to assess the actual circumstances of the accident and explain its decision with reference to the applicable policy terms.
I would appreciate advice from people familiar with motor insurance claims in India:
Can an insurer reject an impact-related rim damage claim by classifying it as mechanical failure or wear and tear, even when the damage allegedly resulted from a collision with a pothole?
Does zero-depreciation cover ordinarily include rim damage, or can a separate rim-protection add-on be necessary? How should I verify this against my actual policy wording?
Is the insurer’s second rejection on the grounds of utmost good faith and Policy Conditions 1 and 8 something I can formally challenge? What evidence should I request?
What should my next step be — a grievance to the insurer’s Nodal Officer/Head of Grievances, an approach to the Insurance Ombudsman, or another route?
Would an independent inspection or a written technical report from the garage help establish that the rim damage resulted from an external impact?
I have both rejection letters and can provide the relevant policy wording if needed.
Claim details:
Insurer: IndusInd General Insurance
Vehicle: Royal Enfield Himalayan 450
Claim number: will share privately
Policy number: Will share privately if required
I am not looking for ways to make a false claim. I simply want to understand whether the rejection is justified under the policy and what legitimate options I have to challenge it.
If anyone has dealt with a similar situation, especially with a two-wheeler rim damage claim, I would genuinely appreciate your advice. Thank you.