Sample audit report · Genuine Vitari audit · Client identifiers redacted
This is what you receive after the free audit: a written, prioritised analysis of your actual policy schedule. The document below is a real audit of a South African retail business, reproduced with the client’s identifiers removed. Every number is real.
Client & scope
Client: ████████ (Pty) Ltd — convenience retail / mini-market
Reviewed: Full commercial policy schedule, premium notification and Sasria lines
Turnaround: 5 working days from receipt of schedule
Schedule summary — sums insured and immediate verdict
| Cover | Sum insured | Verdict | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fire | R 57,310,000 | Possible over/under-valuation — no breakdown of building vs stock vs contents on file. | High |
| Business Interruption | R 103,200,000 | BI sum nearly double the Fire sum. BI must be built from declared gross profit and indemnity period — not set arbitrarily above property values. | High |
| Theft | R 40,000 | Very low for a retail grocery holding tobacco and alcohol lines. Likely materially underinsured. | High |
| Money | R 197,000 | Limits plausible only if supported by safe rating and cash-handling controls — unverified. | Medium |
| Goods in Transit | R 180,000 | Primary GIT of R180k sits alongside a Sasria GIT annual carry of R60,000,000 — per-consignment limits unreconciled. | Medium |
| Combined Liability | R 2,000,000 | Claims-made basis; retroactive date unconfirmed. Product liability for foodborne illness not verified. | High |
| Umbrella Liability | R 19,000,000 | Potential duplication with primary liability. Attachment point unconfirmed — premium may be buying cover twice. | Medium |
| Electronic Equipment | R 170,000 | Unlikely to replace tills, CCTV, refrigeration controllers and servers; no data-restoration or breakdown cover confirmed. | Medium |
Extract — the full report covers 16 schedule lines including Sasria alignment.
Key findings
1. The Fire / BI mismatch. Business interruption cover of R103.2m against a fire sum of R57.3m is a red flag in either direction: overstated BI inflates premium for nothing; understated BI starves the business in a real loss. The BI sum must be recalculated from 12–36 months of declared turnover, gross profit and a defensible indemnity period.
2. A theft limit that ignores the stockroom. R40,000 of theft cover for a business holding fast-moving, high-value stock is not a limit — it is a gesture. One incident could exceed it several times over.
3. Paying twice on liability. A R19m umbrella sitting on a R2m primary layer, with no confirmed attachment point, suggests the programme has been sold, not structured. If the primary limit can be raised cost-effectively, the umbrella may be redundant.
4. Claims-made time bombs. Both liability lines are claims-made. If retroactive dates are wrong — or the policy is ever cancelled without run-off — historic exposure is uninsured. Nobody had checked.
5. The load-shedding gap. For a refrigeration-dependent retailer, spoilage from power interruption and equipment breakdown is the single most likely loss event — and standard fire-based BI wording does not respond to it without a specific extension. None was on file.
Ranked recommendations
The full report closes with ten corrective actions ranked by priority — from an immediate asset-schedule and valuation exercise, through BI recalculation on actual financials, to removal of redundant covers where premium is buying nothing. Each item is written so the client can hand it to any broker — including their current one — and demand it gets done.
Your Programme. This Level of Scrutiny. Free.
Send us your schedule; get a report like this on your own programme within a week.