Cartrack review: Warranty claim dispute - failure to disclose terms and conditions

On the 19th August, I reported the theft of my vehicle to Car Track within the stipulated time frame, as per the terms and conditions provided during our verbal contract. While I understand the importance of adhering to contractual obligations, I believe there is a significant oversight in the information that was conveyed to my husband during our conversation. During the initial agreement, I was informed about the requirement to contact Car Track within 6 hours of the car being stolen, which I diligently adhered to. However, it has come to my attention that there are additional terms and conditions that were not disclosed to me during our conversation, specifically the requirement for the vehicle to be checked every 3 months to maintain the warranty as per there reasoning of declining my warranty payout. i requested the audio where my husband was on the call with them in regards to the contract, I reviewed the audio recording that was sent to him in regards to the verbal agreement, and in confirmation of what I had said there was no mention of this crucial requirement during our discussion. I am well aware of what my rights are as a consumer, and cartrack is taking advantage of their customers, by making us pay your monthly premiums for absolutely nothing! According to the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) Section 39, it is implied that in any transaction or agreement pertaining to the supply of goods or services to a consumer, there is a warranty of quality. This means that as a consumer, I should reasonably expect that all relevant terms and conditions that could potentially void the warranty would be disclosed to me during our conversation. Which it was not, only that we should report it within 6 hours, should you have mentioned that we need to come in every 3 months as per your reasoning for not wanting to pay us out for your lack of service, we would have ensured we were within warranty at all times, because why else would we waste our money paying you each month? Furthermore, the CPA Section 50 outlines that a person must not make false, misleading, or deceptive representations in connection with the supply of goods or services to a consumer. Omitting material facts, such as the requirement for quarterly vehicle checks to maintain the warranty, is considered misleading. they have probably declined so many customers' pay outs because you deliberately left out information in our verbal contracts. It is the service providers duty to ensure that they make us aware and that we fully understand whats in the Terms and conditions, I am to date under the impression that the Terms and conditions that were discussed in our verbal contract was reflective in the terms, which clearly is not. I am left in a difficult situation due to the lack of disclosure regarding this important conditions. They firstly failed at locating our car, they failed at providing us with data for the day it was stolen, yet their agents could tell us they located the car that morning to a warehouse in Kyasands, suddenly they have no data available for that morning and now they are failing to upkeep their side of the contract by paying us out. I'm requesting a review of my case and a reconsideration of my warranty claim for the stolen vehicle.