What a useful review changed
The value of an audit appears in the details: a corrected contribution basis, a coherent evidence trail, or a scheme query answered with the right record.
“Our payroll deduction differed from the scheme quote, and each party was using a different effective date. Host Routehub laid out both calculations and showed exactly where they split. The report was short enough to send internally without another explanation.”
— Benefits coordinator, Midrand engineering firm
“I expected the eligibility review to produce an immediate answer. It did not — one date still had to be confirmed by my previous scheme. What helped was knowing that this was the only open point, and being given a precise question to ask.”
— Individual applicant, Johannesburg
“The dependant records had three versions of a surname and the student confirmation covered the wrong term. Aisha's evidence map made the gaps obvious without making us feel careless.”
— Medical aid adviser, Pretoria
“They found that the contribution was mathematically right but based on the wrong membership category. That distinction changed how we approached the administrator.”
— HR manager, Gauteng retail group
Case note: two correct totals, one wrong period
An employer approached us after a new member’s payslip and scheme welcome letter showed different amounts. Both calculations were arithmetically correct. The scheme had applied the April contribution table, while payroll had retained the prior table for a deduction processed before its annual update.
We reconstructed the dates, separated the current monthly amount from the once-off payroll adjustment and prepared a two-line reconciliation for the administrator. The parties could then address the effective period rather than repeatedly recalculating the same figures.
Case note: dependant evidence with one missing link
A family application included marriage documentation and prior-membership certificates, but a scheme query referred broadly to “proof of dependency.” Our review showed that spouse status was documented; the unresolved item concerned an adult child and current student status. By separating the dependant records, the applicant could respond to the actual gap without resending unrelated identity documents.
Names and non-essential details are withheld or adjusted in these accounts. Outcomes depend on each file and the medical scheme’s final decision; past work does not guarantee acceptance or a particular contribution.
Request a review of your file{.button}