Accessibility Planning & Development, Inc.

Mr. [redacted] purchased a GAP I Gap Waiver Addendum (Contract) from [redacted] Chevrolet providing GAP coverage in connection with the purchase and financing of a 2013 Chevrolet Malibu on July 31, 2013.   A claim was initiated on Mr. [redacted]’s behalf on 10/26/16 for a date of loss of...

07/27/16.  The required claim information was requested from Mr. [redacted] in writing on 10/27/16, 11/22/16, and on 12/14/16.  The required information was also requested from Mr. [redacted] verbally on 12/12/16 and 12/22/16.   After receiving Mr. [redacted]’s Revdex.com complaint, we contacted the insurance company directly on 12/22/16, in an attempt to assist the customer in obtaining the required claim documentation.  We had to contact the insurance company again on 12/29/16 to request the required information a second time.  Later that same day, we received an e-mail from the insurance adjuster with the missing documentation.  The claim was then sent for review and processing.   The Contract states:   The Contract does not agree to cover any amounts deducted from the insurer’s settlement.  According to the total loss evaluation received from the insurance company, there was a condition adjustment of $729 for stains to the carpets and damage to the front bumper.  This adjustment was also deducted in the GAP calculations.               “Financing Contract Balance means the amount owed by You to pay off the outstanding Financial Agreement account as of Date of Loss.  This amount shall not include…any proceeds which may be recovered by canceling any insurance coverages, service contracts and/or warranties…”             The service contract refund is actually paid to the lienholder by another entity so is deducted from the claim benefits.   Our specific GAP Benefit Calculations were:   Gross Unpaid Balance            (on dol)          =                        $12,967.77 Less Service Contract Refund                      =                        $  1,419.44 Less Condition Adjustments                         =                        $    729.00 Less ACV (insurance checks)                       =             ...⇄   $10,970.69 GAP BENEFITS                                           =                        $ (- 151.36)   There were no GAP benefits available for Mr. [redacted] therefore, his claim was denied on December 30, 2016.  A denial letter was mailed to the customer.   We believe we have processed the claim according to the language of the waiver. Tell us why here...

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: there is no way to contact the supervisor other than email.. I give this business F rating
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  The vehicle was recovered on the 30th day and not within 30 days.  The initial police report was taken on on 4/20/17 at 9:43am.  The recovery report time dispatch notified was 5/20/17 at 2035.  Also the damage report didn't include the interior damage and to the vehicle and damage to the 20" wheels.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting part of this response because: Any and all delays were solely due to IAS's handling of the claim and should be responsible for interest charges after their initial payment date. IAS mentioned they were not sent proper documentation that mentions the amount of sales tax paid on the vehicle when purchased. I do not see on the contract submitted this amount either, thus IAS should have reached out to myself knowing that I am an Ohio resident and that car insurance company must reimburse for sales tax to find out what that amount was.As for the Tech Package delay. In all communications with IAS when asked if my car came equipped with a tech package or additional warranties purchased, I indicated an extended warranty was purchased and has since been canceled and a rebate processed through the company servicing the warranty, and that no tech package was purchased. This is also indicated on the sales contract provided from Kings Kia to IAS (see attached the sales contract). No tech package is listed. For whatever reason, not heading my answers or looking at the sales contract, which is a required document for their claims process, they caused an illegitimate delay that could have been avoided on there end, and could not have been prevented on my end. (i.e. nothing that I said or did, or didn't do, caused this delay)However, the delay due to the tech package diabolical delayed the initial payment being determined and issued to PNC bank. Because of this I understand I am still liable for any and all interest charges as well as keeping the account current until IAS made their payment. this is not the issue.When IAS issued their first check for $6,940.18 on 07/31/17, processed by PNC bank on 08/04/17, it included the improperly calculated amount of sales tax as described above and described in IAS initial response to this complaint. this is the only delay I feel IAS is not completely responsible for, but could have been prevented. They knew they were deducting sales tax from the overall claim amount to be paid. They should have asked for the proper amount rather than risk improper payment, which was sent. On 08/22/17, IAS received proof of the actual sales tax reimbursement issued in order to recalculate their new payment. On 08/30/17 IAS issued what should have been the final check of $7,080.76, however this was not the actual amount that was sent as described by IAS's response to this complaint.I accept that any interest incurred prior 08/30/17 and the subsequent seven days PNC took to process the check on 09/06/17 and keeping the account in good standing was in my duty. However 9/06/17 should have signaled the end of the contract as that should have been the final check. However because the check was improperly written again, IAS had to request proof of the check, and then upon receiving the check, had to discuss with PNC about the issue. Provision of proof that I had to provide as requested by IAS, which meant calling the bank, requesting a detailed history of the account to prove that two different checks were deposited for the same amount, and then a copy of the check, all of which has to be mailed by U.S. mail to the account holder was sent into IAS on 09/26/17, to which they still had to call PNC to confirm for some reason. None of the previous paragraph should have had to been completed by me. IAS should have taken my complaint of an improper check being issued for the second time, called the lien holder, PNC, and obtained the information themselves. This could have sped up the process if the information over the phone with PNC would suffice for IAS. IAS issued their final check to PNC in the amount of $140.58 on 10/09/17, 33 days after the SECOND final check should have been written.IAS should be responsible for the daily interest that would have occurred on the account for the 33 days it took them to rectify their mistake. It was their fault even though they are still "looking into the issue" that the check was written wrong. In no way did I cause this delay along with the "tech package delay". IAS may argue that part of the 33 days that elapsed was due to myself having to acquire the proof of the improper check. Again, as mentioned before, this is something that IAS could have taken care of themselves when I called in on 08/15/17 by calling PNC and requesting the information such as the check number, that could have been given over the phone. At the very minimum, IAS is responsible for the 13 days of interest that elapsed between them receiving the proof I provided them of the misprinted check and the day in which they issued the final $140.58.This entire GAP claim process was initiated on 04/24/17, and IAS had all the documentation they needed to pay the claim (aside from the proper sales tax amount that they should have requested) 24 days later on 05/18/14.  45 days should have been what was needed to complete the claim however it took 144 days, spanning five (5) car payments for myself, a huge burden when juggling two car payments. In the end IAS should respectfully cover the interest incurred for the 33 days of delay they caused. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards, their customer service is terrible I would rate their customer service f I was very dissatisfied with their service
[redacted]

We are in receipt of Ms. [redacted] complaint.   Ms. [redacted] lienholder, [redacted], initiated a claim for possible GAP benefits on her behalf on 01/26/17.  IAS mailed letters to both Ms. [redacted] and [redacted] on 1/30/17, 3/23/17 and again on 5/21/17 requesting the required information...

needed in order to process her claim for GAP benefits.  In addition, IAS also e-mailed [redacted] on 2/91/7 and verbally spoke with them on 5/261/7 again requesting the missing information.  IAS also spoke to Ms. [redacted] on 2/13/17, 3/7/17 and on 4/6/17 again requesting the missing information.  To date, IAS has not been provided with the required information to process this claim.   IAS needs a complete copy of the GAP Vehicle Protection Debt Relief Waiver Addendum (Contract) sold to Ms. [redacted]  Until this GAP Contract is received, we are unable to process her claim for GAP benefits.   Ms. [redacted] stated in her complaint letter that IAS contacted her four days after the accident and advised her ‘we would take care of everything.’  IAS never called Ms. [redacted] so it is now known who she would have spoken to four days after the loss.   Ms. [redacted] also states she called IAS twelve times however, she has only called IAS three times.  All phone calls are recorded.  In addition, IAS has only received two faxes that were not sent from [redacted].  Therefore, if Ms. [redacted] faxed everything five times at least three of those faxes were not received by IAS.   The customer refers in her complaint letter as having purchased GAP insurance.  As indicated on the front page of Ms. [redacted] Contract, “I understand that this Debt Relief Waiver Addendum is not an offer of insurance coverage.”   The GAP Contract does not agree to cover delinquent payments or extensions.  According to the payment history received from [redacted] there was one (1) extension.  Ms. [redacted] would remain responsible for this extension.   Ms. [redacted] was required to make payments according to the terms and conditions of the finance agreement she signed when purchasing this vehicle.  If Ms. [redacted] has not been fulfilling her obligation under the finance agreement by continuing to make monthly payments after the vehicle was deemed a total loss, additional interest or additional late charges could have been added to the loan balance and her credit could have been affected.  Ms. [redacted] would be responsible for any fees added to the loan after its inception date and she would need to discuss this matter with [redacted] if she feels her credit has been affected as IAS does not report to credit bureaus.   Upon receipt of the GAP Contract Ms. [redacted] purchased, we will be able to process her claim. Tell us why here...

As previously advised, Ms. [redacted] Contract states: "Alternatively, if the vehicle is stolen and RECOVERED within thirty (30) days said Registered Owner/Lessee will be reimbursed the comprehensive amount deducted by the Insurance Company in their settlement with respect to the deductible up to $1,000."The vehicle was recovered on the 30th day therefore, the deductible reimbursement clause applied to this loss and Ms. [redacted] was reimbursed her $100 deductible she incurred for this loss.Mr. [redacted] rejection states the damage report did not include the damage to the wheels however, that is not correct.  The estimate from the insurance company did include damages to two wheels.  In addition, based on the photographs provided by the insurance company there was little, if any, damages to the interior of Ms. [redacted] vehicle when it was recovered.

Ms.
[redacted] purchased a Tire & Wheel Road Hazard Service Contract on her
vehicle on April 14, 2014.  One of the
coverages under the Contract is 24-Hour Toll-Free Assistance which is provided
by an independent entity.The
Contract states service will be provided for covered services up...

to $50 for
help in changing an inflated spare or up to $50 for towing your vehicle to the
closest service station.Ms.
[redacted] states in her complaint that she contacted Road Side Assistance and
they could not provide any assistance to her because that interstate was too
busy to provide service on.  We contacted
Road Side Assistance (who records all telephone calls) and asked them to review
the call.  The results of their review
showed that it was explained to Ms. [redacted] that they called several providers
to go out and change her tire but due to safety concerns, they would not change
the tire on the Interstate.  The
providers advised they would have to tow the vehicle off the interstate and
then change the tire however, there would be some additional charges that would
not be covered under her Contract.  Ms.
[redacted] advised Road Side Assistance that she would not pay any additional
charges, and would just contact IAS.Ms.
[redacted] chose not to accept assistance from Road Side Assistance because there
would be additional charges not covered under the Contract.  That was a choice she made.We
regret she was not satisfied with the outcome of her call with Road Side
Assistance.Ms.
[redacted] commented that she would like a full refund on this Contract.  Per the terms and conditions of her Contract,
she can cancel the Contract at any time by surrendering it to the issuing
dealer along with a written request to cancel.  “If a claim has been made against the Contract or if the Contract has
been in YOUR possession for more than sixty (60) days, the Dealer will make a
pro-rata refund less a thirty-five dollar ($35) cancellation fee, less claims
paid.  This refund will be based on the
elapsed time from the Contract Sale Date, and will only be provided if you are the
original purchaser of this Contract.”

We are in receipt of Mr. [redacted] concerns regarding his claim or GAP benefits on his 2015 Kia Cadenza. Mr. [redacted] initiated his claim on 4/24/17 for a 4/13/17 date of loss. The required information was requested from him both verbally and in writing. On 5/18/17, it appeared IAS had received all the...

documentation needed for his claim so his claim was then sent for review. During the review and approval process, it was determined the insurance company may have not given Mr. [redacted] credit for all the options on his vehicle. According to the documents we received from the dealership, his vehicle was equipped with a Technology Package which was not shown on the total loss documents received from the insurance company. While we were in the course of addressing this discrepancy with the insurance company, Mr. [redacted] called us on 07/26/17 and stated his vehicle did not have the Technology Package. His claim was approved that day for a GAP deficiency and a claim check was issued on 07/31/17 for $6,940.18 and mailed to his lienholder, [redacted] On 08/07/17, Mr. [redacted] called wanting to know why his loan balance had not been paid in full. We went over the claim calculations with him and he disagreed with the sales tax deduction of $1 ,446.24. Based on the terms and conditions of the GAP waiver, if sales taxes are financed into the automobile loan, then they are included in the GAP calculations. Since the total loss documents received from the insurance company did not include sales taxes in the settlement, sales taxes were manually calculated and deducted in the GAP claim. Mr. [redacted] stated he received a lesser sales tax reimbursement than the amount deducted in our claim. He was advised we would need proof of the sales taxes he had been reimbursed for and then we would re-review our claim to determine if additional GAP benefits were owed. IAS would not have known how much the insurance company paid out to Mr. [redacted] as in Ohio the insurance company owes the lessor of (l) the sales taxes on the vehicle deemed a total loss or (2) the sales taxes on the replacement vehicle. On 08/15/17, IAS received our claim check back from [redacted] stating the claim check was not sufficient enough to pay the balance due in full. We contacted [redacted] and they advised the claim check was returned in error. They asked us to fax them a copy ofthe letter we received with the returned claim check and stated they would contact us after they researched what occurred. We faxed them a copy of the requested information. On 08/22/17, we received a copy of the insurance check reimbursing Mr. [redacted] for sales taxes in the amount of $1,317.17. Since the actual reimbursement was less than what we had deducted for ($1,457.75) we would owe an additional $140.58 for the difference. On 08/25/17, we requested the original claim check be voided (since it was now in our possession again) and re-issued for $7,080.76 ($6,940.18 + $140.58). The claim check was re-issued and mailed to [redacted] on 8/30/17 (see attached). Mr. [redacted] contacted IAS on 09/19/17 to let us know that [redacted] received another check for $6,940.18 and not for $7,080.76. However, according to our system, the check indicated it was issued for $7,080.76. On 09/26/17, Mr. [redacted] called back to advise PNC was still telling him the check they received was for $6,940.18 and not for $7,080.76, and that he was going to send us a copy of the claim check. We are unclear as to what occurred causing the re-issued claim check to be issued for $6,940.18. As you can see on the attached check copy, somehow there was an error that occurred when the check was issued as you can see where it shows $7,080.76 in the bottom right hand corner while the check only printed for $6,940.18. Our Accounting Department is currently looking into this matter further. We have requested a claim check be issued for the $140.58 which is still owed on this claim. Upon receipt of this claim check it will be mailed to [redacted] We regret there were any errors on the re-issuance ofthe claim check, and that is still being looked into. The terms and conditions of the Contract state: "EXCEPTIONS: Amounts not waived include: l. Interest, rental or other charges that accrue after the date of loss... " The GAP Contract does not cover additional interest or any late charges after the date of loss. Therefore, we will be unable to honor Mr. [redacted] request for compensation of same. "Terms and Conditions g. In the event of a total loss it is your responsibility to keep your account current until any deficiency is determined and paid." Mr. [redacted] is required to make payments according to the terms ofthe finance agreement he signed when purchasing this vehicle. If Mr. [redacted] was not fulfilling his obligation under the finance agreement by continuing to make monthly payments after the vehicle was deemed a total loss, additional interest or late charges could have been added to the loan balance and his credit could have been affected. Mr. [redacted] would be responsible for any fees added to the loan after its inception date and he would need to discuss this matter with the lienholder, [redacted], if he feels his credit has been affected as IAS does not report to credit bureaus. We apologize for any delays Mr. [redacted] feels were encountered during the handling of his claim. However, we believe we processed his claim according to the terms and conditions ofhis Contract.

Mr. [redacted] purchased a GAP I Gap Waiver Addendum (Contract) in connection with the purchase and financing of a 2011 Mazda 3 on 01/14/14.    Mr. [redacted] refers throughout his complaint letter to the GAP coverage as being GAP insurance.  As indicated on Mr. [redacted] Contract, “This...

Contract is not an insurance policy, does not provide property damage, liability or collision insurance, and does not comply with any financial responsibility law or any other law mandating motor vehicle insurance coverage.”   The Contract is designed to waive the difference between the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle involved in the total loss and the outstanding balance still owed on that vehicle from the purchaser to the lender, when a total loss occurs.   Mr. [redacted] initiated his claim for GAP benefits on 08/17/16 for a date of loss of 08/01/16.  The required information needed to process his claim was requested from him on 08/17/16, 10/20/16, 10/25/16, and again on 10/31/16.  We received the final documents on 11/04/16 and the claim was sent to processing.   The Contract does not agree to cover any late charges.  According to the payment history received from Mr. [redacted] lienholder there were unpaid late charges on the date of loss.  Those charges were included in our claim calculations.   The claim calculations were:  $9,135.66 the payoff of the loan on the date of loss, less $174.71 for late charges shown on the payment history, less $8,585.87 the amount of the insurance check.  A claim payment for $375.08 was issued to his lienholder, Huntington National Bank, on 11/14/16 – 10 days after receiving the final claim documents.   Mr. [redacted] was required to make payments according to the terms of the finance agreement he signed when purchasing this vehicle.  If Mr. [redacted] was not fulfilling his obligation under the finance agreement by continuing to make monthly payments after the vehicle was deemed a total loss, additional interest or late charges could have been added to the loan balance and his credit could have been affected.  Mr. [redacted] would be responsible for any fees added to the loan after its inception date.  He would need to discuss this matter with the lienholder if he feels his credit has been affected as IAS does not report to credit bureaus.   Any remaining balance on this loan would be attributable to the unpaid late charges, any late charges added since the date of this loss, and any additional interest added to the loan since the date of this loss.  Mr. [redacted] would be responsible for any of these fees.   We regret Mr. [redacted] feels there were delays during the processing of his claim.  However, until all documents are received, we are unable to process a claim for GAP benefits.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I like how this company brings up claims for a vehicle I had over 7 years ago and completely fail to mention that I have a NEW policy with them now for a completely different vehicle. These tire and wheel warranties are all scams as far as I'm concerned and their claims process is very archaic. These type of companies will be out of business as current technology and new processes will put them out of business with these outdated methods. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] purchased a R.O.A.D. InTire Vehicle Tire and Wheel Guarantee on 12/03/14 from [redacted] Chevrolet Cadillac on his 2014 Cadillac ELR.  The tire and wheel guarantee is designed to cover damages resulting from a road hazard.On 03/28/16, a technician from [redacted] Cadillac...

initiated a claim with IAS on behalf of Mr. [redacted] for damages to his vehicle – a nail in the sidewall of the right front tire.  [redacted] Cadillac is not the dealership that sold this Contract to Mr. [redacted].  Specific claim information regarding the damages and repairs were obtained from the technician, and the claim procedures were explained.  The technician told IAS the work had not been completed yet.Later that same day, we received a final signed invoice for the repairs.  The repairs were actually completed on 03/15/16 according to the invoice from the dealership.  Since the repairs had been completed prior to the claim being initiated with IAS, the claim was denied.The Contract specifically states “You must receive prior authorization from the claims center before any repairs or replacement is begun.”  This statement or one very similar appears eight (8) different times throughout the Contract.The reason we require pre-authorization from the repair technician is so they can provide independent information regarding the cause of damages, type of damages the tire or wheel sustained, specific information regarding the tread depth at the time of the loss, costs, etc.  There must be a minimum tread depth for a claim to be covered and there are some types of losses which are excluded under the warranty.  It is during the telephone call with the technician that it is determined if the claim meets the warranty guidelines or not.In addition, the Contract states "It is your responsibility to ensure that the technician has obtained an authorization number for repairs prior to any work being completed on your vehicle."This was not Mr. [redacted]’s first claim under this Contract.  Three previous claims have been paid in which pre-authorization was received before repairs were completed.  He should be familiar with the terms and conditions of his Contract as ultimately he is responsible for ensuring they are met.We regret Mr. [redacted] is not satisfied with our claims decision however, his claim remains denied as repairs were completed prior to receiving pre-authorization which is a condition of this Contract.

Ms. [redacted] purchased a GAP I Gap Waiver Addendum (Contract) for her 2013 Ford Escape.   She refers to the Contract as being gap insurance.  Her Contract states:  “Warning:  This Contract is not an insurance policy and does not provide property damage, liability or collision...

insurance, and does not comply with any financial responsibility law or any other law mandating motor vehicle insurance coverage.”   The Contract is designed to waive the difference between the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle involved in the total loss and the outstanding balance still owed on that vehicle from the purchaser to the lender, when a total loss occurs.   The Contract does not provide coverage for any amounts deducted from the insurer’s settlement due to wear and tear, prior damage, excess mileage, salvage, towing or storage.  The insurance company deducted $400 from Ms. [redacted] total loss settlement for the condition of the glass on the vehicle.  Therefore, this deduction was also considered in the GAP claim calculations.   The terms and conditions of the Contract state:  “Financing Contract Balance means the amount owed by You to pay off the outstanding Financial Agreement account as of Date of Loss.  This amount shall not include any…future interest…Delinquent Payments, deferred payments…or any proceeds which may be recovered by canceling any insurance coverages, service contracts and/or warranties, credit life, accidental and health insurance or other cancelable items.”   Ms. [redacted] purchased an extended service contract and an etch warranty when she purchased her vehicle.  The refunds are actually paid to the lienholder by another entity so are deducted from the claim benefits.   An extension was found on the payment history from her lienholder.  Since extensions are not covered under this Contract, a deduction was included in our claim figures.   Ms. [redacted] was required to make payments according to the terms of the finance agreement she signed when purchasing this vehicle.  If she was not fulfilling her obligation under the finance agreement by continuing to make monthly payments after the vehicle was deemed a total loss, additional interest or late charges could have been added to the loan balance and her credit could have been affected.  Ms. [redacted] would be responsible for any fees added to the loan after its inception date and she would need to discuss this matter with her lienholder if she feels her credit has been affected as IAS does not report to credit bureaus.   A payment for $150.89 was issued to her lienholder for the GAP deficiency owed on 03/27/17.  Since a GAP deficiency was paid out under this Contract, Ms. [redacted] is not entitled to a refund of the premium she paid for the GAP Contract.    Any remaining balance on Ms. [redacted]’s loan is attributable to the condition adjustment ($400), the extension found on the payment history ($529.36), any additional interest that has accrued since the date of this loss (5.79%), and any late fees being charged since the date of loss.   In the event Ms. [redacted] can’t locate her GAP Contract, we will e-mail her a copy of it after responding to her concerns. Tell us why here...

Ms. [redacted] purchased a GAP I Gap Waiver Addendum from Sunrise Buick GMC providing GAP coverage in connection with the purchase and financing of a 2011 Buick Lacrosse on 09/21/14.  Ms. [redacted] initiated her claim on 1/18/17 and the claim was concluded on 2/27/17. The Contract is designed to...

waive the difference between the Actual Cash Value of the vehicle involved in the total loss and the outstanding balance still owed on that vehicle from the purchaser to the lender, when a total loss occurs. Per the terms and conditions of the GAP Contract, “Actual Cash Value means the retail value of the Covered Collateral on the Date of Loss, prior to its physical damage or theft, as determined by the Primary Insurance carrier (including tax, title and license), less the Primary Insurance deductible amount, where permitted by law.  (NOTE:  This GAP Waiver Addendum does not provide coverage for any amounts deducted from the insurer’s settlement due to wear and tear, prior damage, excess mileage, salvage, towing or storage.)” According to the total loss evaluation received from [redacted] there was a conditional adjustment of $70 for minor damage to the exterior trim of the vehicle.  Therefore, this deduction was also included in the GAP claim calculations. The Contract states “Financing Contract Balance means the amount owed by You to pay off the outstanding Financial Agreement account as of the Date of Loss.  This amount shall not include any and all…future interest…finance charges, late charges, Delinquent Payments, deferred payments…” According to the payment history IAS received from her lienholder[redacted] the lienholder added $199.00 for finance fees to the beginning loan balance.  In addition, her payment history included two extensions.  Since the GAP Contract does not cover finance charges and extensions those fees were included in our claim calculations. The Contract also states “In the event of a request for waiver, You must provide…to the GAP Administrator….the following documentation before any waiver under this Addendum can be processed…”  Due to privacy laws, IAS is unable to obtain her personal information from insurance companies, lienholders, etc.  Therefore, the customer is responsible for obtaining and providing the required claim documents to IAS for their claim. The balance of this loan on the date of loss was $13,672.84, less the insurance check $12,950.46, less the conditional adjustment $70, less the finance charge $199, less the 2 extensions $626.76, equals (- $173.38).  Therefore, there was not a GAP deficiency to be paid out under the terms of her GAP Contract. The Cancellation Provisions of her Contract state “If a cancellation is requested after 30 days You will receive a refund/credit of the GAP Waiver Addendum fee calculated in accordance with the Pro-rata refund (or by the refund method as required in Your state) less a $25 cancellation fee.”  Ms. [redacted] needs to contact the selling dealership to request and sign the appropriate cancellation request.  Any pro-rata refund due on the $800 cost of the Contract would be payable to the lienholder unless she provides the dealership with proof that her loan has been paid in full. We regret Ms. [redacted] is not satisfied with the prompt handling of her claim.  There was no GAP deficiency to be paid out under this Contract therefore, her claim was denied. Any remaining balance on her loan is attributable to the finance charge added to the loan after its inception, the conditional adjustment, the two extensions, any late charges that have been added to the loan since the date of loss, and any additional interest added to the loan since the date of loss.  Ms. [redacted] remains responsible for any of these fees as they are not covered by the GAP Contract. Tell us why here...