AUL Corporation

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Vehicle was not modified by owner, vehicle was purchased as is thus no modifications were added after contract with AUL and no parts would interfere with operation of vehicle AUL should honor its contract Vehicle is years old and unlike a new vehicle will see replacement of wear and tear items AUL accepted responsibility when they accepted our money and signature, they should have inspected car at sale date and not accepted responsibilty for warranty work We were either contractually defrauded, both VW and AUL selling us a contract that they didn't intend to honor or a systematic scheme to have customers buy worthless policies.Sincerely, [redacted] ***

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/11/12) */ [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com Dear M [redacted] We are in receipt of your email dated November 3, regarding the complaint you received from Ms [redacted] regarding her attempt to obtain roadside assistance under her AUL Vehicle Service Contract The difficulties Ms [redacted] had when contacting roadside assistance are unfortunateIn an effort to assist and per Ms [redacted] 's request, AUL has cancelled her contract and issued a full 100% refundThe refund was mailed on 11/10/to the lienholder on the contractIn addition, a letter has been mailed to Ms [redacted] 's address on file with the details AUL hopes that the steps we have taken will assist Ms [redacted] in finalizing this matterPlease feel free to contact me with any further questions you may have at [redacted] Sincerely, [redacted] AUL Compliance Manager Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2015/11/17) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Again, the service contract has terms and conditionsThe vehicle did not qualify for seal and gasket coverage due to mileageAUL will maintain our stance on this matterThe customer can cancel by simply calling the dealer and starting the process

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/11/06) */ The additional labor the repair shop is charging is for drilling out the broken bolts which is not covered by this contractThe claim has been correctly adjudicated per the terms of the contract Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/11/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The response from AUL is not acceptable for the following reasons: There is no wording in the contract that states that exhaust bolts are not part of the exhaust manifoldThe certified Ford repair facility manager states that the exhaust bolts are part of the Ford Eexhaust manifold system The Ford repair facility manager further stated that this RV's Ford engine must be pulled to avoid any further damage to the exhaust manifold and breaking additional bolts, due to its age and its high mileage Further if the exhaust manifold system is not repaired in this manner, carbon monoxide leakage increases and can flow into the cabin, resulting in a safety hazard to driver and passengersEngine valves stand the risk of burning up adding to repair costs for AUL and claimant AUL has not provided any name of a repair facility that is able or is willing to repair the exhaust manifold effectively without pulling the engine, even though AUL dispute the need for pulling the engine In an effort to reach middle ground and resolve this dispute, claimant is willing to pay $and requests AUL pay $for a total of $3,towards repairs of exhaust manifold systemThis includes claimants $deductible and AULs initial response of $ Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/11/19) */ The contract is specific listed meaning only the parts listed as covered are covered.The exhaust manifold can be replaced without removing the enginethe broken studs are not listed therefore the extra labor to remove the engine and repair the studs is not coveredAUL has correctly adjudicated this claim and will maintain our position Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2015/11/30) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) AUL has NOT provided the contract wording that stipulates the bolts are not a part of the exhaust manifold As stated previously by the O'Meara Ford expert repair servicemen, the Ford exhaust manifold cannot be adequately or safely repaired on an engine of this age and mileage without removing the engine which requires removing the existing exhaust manifold bolts!! AUL has continued to ignore this factor AUL refused to negotiate and did not provide any documentation or data stating that removal of the exhaust manifold bolts were not covered in the repair of the exhaust manifoldThe contract reads: Section &WHAT IS COVERED BY THIS VEHICLE SERVICE CONTRACT Engine Group: ...Crankshaft and bearings, oil pump, fuel pump, internal timing gears or chain/bet, camshaft, camshaft bearings, valve lifters, rocker arm assemblies and push rods, valve guides, pistons and rings, wrist pins, connecting rods, exhaust manifold, distributor drive gear and water pump Because there is no stipulation in the contract that removal of the exhaust manifold bolts is not covered, it appears that AUL is finding a unique interpretation of the contract to AVOID paying for the insured service! The last dispute resolution was an attempt to meet AUL at a middle ground as per the Revdex.com request, in spite of the contract coverage which clearly states that the exhaust manifold is covered by this vehicle contractIn addition, all diagrams of exhaust manifold systems clearly showed studs/bolts as part of that systemAUL asserts: "The contract is specific listed meaning only the parts listed as covered are coveredThe exhaust manifold can be replaced without removing the engine." According to the O'Meara Ford service manager, this repair cannot be done adequately nor safely on an engine of this age and mileageAUL also asserts: "The broken studs are not listed." Claimant asserts: the broken studs ARE a part of the exhaust manifold as shown in multiple diagrams of manifold systemsAUL asserts: "therefore, the extra labor to remove the engine and repair the studs is not covered." To think that AUL denies studs/bolts as part of the exhaust manifold system is negligent and arbitraryAs stated before, claimant agreed to pay nearly half the repair costs and once again, AUL REFUSED to meet at the middle ground under reasonable and fair resolution If AUL cannot provide the original document with the specific wording that states the studs/bolts are not part of the exhaust manifold system, they may be liable for negligence Again claimant urges AUL to reconsider the middle ground resolution so this dispute does not have to be elevated

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/19) */ The vehicle was towed in to shopThe customer complained of overheatingThe only diagnosis the shop had was coolant/oil intermixNo verified failure was establishedAUL asked for further diagnosis as they were requesting engine replacement This has not been performedAUL hired a 3rd party inspection company to inspect the shop diagnosis and a cause of failure was not established due to no tear down/diagnosisThe same diagnosis was present on 12-10-At that time the radiator was replacedThe head gasket is covered per the terms of the contractAUL is asking for further diagnosis to determine the cause of the overheatAfter proper diagnosis and a failure established AUL would be happy to continue this claim

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/10/01) */ MBuenrostro, Thank you for your email dated September 30, Following is AUL's response to our customer's complaint (customer's name has been omitted to protect her privacy) Our customer was issued an AUL Warranty on September 3, by a dealer partner, however, at that time, the dealer partner did not have the appropriate AUL paperwork in place so it was necessary to place our customer's warranty on hold As of September 30, 2015, the dealer partner's paperwork has been finalized and our customer's warranty is now in status and is ready to have a claim filed against itOur customer will simply need to take her vehicle to a licensed repair facility and have them contact AUL Claims at with a complete diagnosis before repairs are performed AUL can understand our customer's frustration with this situationDue to the inconvenience this caused, AUL has adjusted the effective date of our customer's warranty to today, 10/1/2015, and it will be in effect from this date for months or miles, whichever occurs firstWe have mailed a letter to the address on file for our customer with the details AUL hopes that the steps we have taken will assist our customer in finalizing this matter Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions, Sincerely, G [redacted] AUL Compliance Manager

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/09/09) */ The contract terms require an oil service performed by a licensed repair shop every months and milesIn order to move forward with claim AUL requested oil service recordsCustomer did not furnish the records and requested AUL cancel the contractAUL cancelled the contract per the customer's requestNo further assistance is available Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/09/10) */ 9-9- Sent via email: [redacted] @ymail.com Hello good morning at this time it has not been resolved they have cancelled my contract will not make repairs to my vehicle [redacted] Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/09/11) */ The contract was cancelled at the request of the customerno further action will be taken

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/18) */ After review of the current claim, although the failure to the above mentioned part was not established, AUL will honor the replacement for the amount of listed above as well as rental

The contract states damage or failures caused by modifications is not coveredIn this case AUL correctly adjudicated the claim by authorizing repairs for parts not effected by the modificationsAUL will continue to honor the contract as writtenIf the customer wishes to cancel the simply need to contact the selling dealer to start the process

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:The Cat Convertor is part of the exhaust which is covered under the warranty and the main reason I purchased the warranty, because I had already replaced 2of them and I knew it was just a matter of time before the third went outSincerely, [redacted]

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/06/09) */ The vehicle was towed to Shmayger Complete Auto careOn X-XX-XXXX Demetre from the shop called AUL to start a claimHe advised AUL the vehicle was towed in and had no oil in the engineHe advised the damage due to lack of oil resulted in engine failureAUL advised him at that time that damage due to lack of lube is not coveredAlso the contract purchased does not have seal and gasket coverageThe shop then recanted their story and said the oil is full and cleanAUL advised diagnosis and tear down procedures and contract cap of The vehicle was moved to ***'s Tire and Auto and a 2nd claim was called in on 5-26- [redacted] at shop reported low end damageagain AUL advised of previous shop and diagnosis proceduresAul then hired a 3rd party inspection company to inspect the damageThe report came back on 6-1-The inspector verified the damage is consistent with oil starvation due to a run low conditionAUL denied the claim AUL has correctly adjudicated the claimAUL has the phone recordings of the original call made which advises the vehicle had no oil in it at time of breakdownThe inspection report pictures backs this statement Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/06/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I am enclosing (Faxing over) three mechanics invoices that I have taken the car toNot one of them states "lack of oil" Now AUL is saying that the mechanic RETRACTED a statement that there was no oil in the carAUL needs to show ANY proof that one of the mechanics stated thisThey are liarsI have the paperwork to prove everything I am claiming and they have NOTHING except, "Oh the mechanic told us one thing and wrote something different." Also, the third mechanic that did indeed tear the engine apart, will state in court that there is NO WAY their independent inspection company could tell there was no oil in the engine because he had it completely apart and their were NO SIGNS of itAUL is lying Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/06/11) */ Again AUL has properly adjudicated this claimThe shops diagnosis and inspection company's notes clearly show lack of lube as the cause Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 12, 2015/06/14) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) All the paperwork proofing this guy is lying was sent back to you via mail om June 12, You will see by the proof imsent that three mecahnics said nothing was wrong with the lack of oilIf you read this, you will see its pretty common that AUL does the same thing to many other people [redacted] -cXXXXXX.html

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/26) */ AUL will be happy to reimburse the customer for the tow fee, simply fax the invoice to XXX-XXX-XXXX attention ***With regards to the claim denial, after review the failed steering lock is not listed for coverage therefore not covered

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/10/06) */ damage or failure due to sludge is not coveredThis is explained in the vehicle service contract booklet on page under section 8, paragraph FThe vehicle has traveled 15,miles since purchased and the repair shop advised the oil filter is the same one they installed prior to selling the vehicleThis was verified by a 3rd party inspection companyAUL has properly adjudicated the claim based on the shop diagnosis and contract termsAUL will maintain our position this claim Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/10/07) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Was the motor inspected before the truck was sold to me? Because it's hard for me to believe that sludge built up in just the months I owned it Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2015/10/09) */ AUL is not placing blamethe contract says damage due to sludge is not covered regardless of the causeHow or when it happens is irrelevant AUL will maintain our position on this claim Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2015/10/13) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) So you're going to warranty a vehicle and not know if there's problems with it? How is that good business?

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/25) */ All claims called in are correctly adjudicates per the terms of the contractThe 3rd claim regarding oil consumption has not been diagnosedAUL awaits the shop findings Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2015/09/14) */ I called gm for help with my truck they said I needed to cancel my warranty which was a service contract to begin with then gm would only pay 40% of the cost which would make me in charge of the 60% which would cost me to dollars in repairs and ive already put in dollars plus payments , I was sold a phony warranty that cost an extra bucks a month and on my loan that didn't even help with anything I needed fixd , this company is a fraud and should be shut down Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 14, 2015/09/15) */ AUL has correctly adjudicated all claims on this contractAUL still awaits the diagnosis on the current claimThe contract can be cancelled by simply calling the dealer and requesting a cancel

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: why sale service contract when the vechicle has [redacted] and know that major parts break at less change my contract to at less cover something or I will cancel it auto credit sales is just at falt as you are to issue this contract .Sincerely, [redacted] ***

AUL has reviewed the claim and found it to be correctly adjudicatedThe vehicle was sold with 171,miles on itIn order to be eligible for seals and gasket option the mileage must be under 125,milesThe customer may cancel at any time by simply contacting the selling dealer and requesting a cancel

AUL has reviewed the claim and found it to be correctly adjudicated per the terms and conditions of the signed contractThe vehicle was sold on 2-8-The 1st and only claim was called in on 5-4-Prior to that the customer called in several times and were advised of claim proceduresThey were also advised no shop had called in to start a claimWhen the claim was called in AUL received the diagnosis and covered the portion of the claim that was covered per the terms of the signed contractAUL advised the contract was still in a temporary status due to the dealer not remitting the actual contract and paymentAUL advised payment will be made upon receipt of contractAUL has correctly adjudicated the claim and will maintain our position on this matter

AUL reached out to Ms [redacted] on 6-20-and advised after review by the claims manager we will issue the full amount of this issue has been corrected

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is on going but I am satisfactory with the outcome that was verbally told to meSincerely, [redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/09) */
The claim was correctly adjudicated per the terms and conditions of the contract purchased and signed forThe compressor clutch is available separate and not a listed covered componentAUL advised this to both the shop and the customerALl
calls are recorded and notes documentedAfter claim was denied the shop advised customer they would replace the clutch and have another shop call in the compressor failureThis is insurance fraud and it is documented by a recorded callNo further assistance available for this claim
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/16) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I have requested and been denied access to the recorded phone conversation, so what the shop owner said or did not say is unproven at this pointAdditionally, it has little bearing on what I said and what I was toldThe first person I spoke to said it was a covered part and would be paid forThe second person also stated it was covered and would be paidIt was not until later in the conversation that AUL changed their positionI have made several inquiries to other shops in the area who have all stated the same thing, that the cost associated with just reporting the compressor is actually more than replacing the entire compressor assembly due to the increased labor of actually having to remove the clutchAdditionally all of the online stores I have checked do not even sell the a/c compressor without the clutchOne mechanic I spoke to said he's never done it any other way in years
The actual cost of the repair is $I purchased the contract for over $With the $deductible I would expect them to honor the contract and pay at least $
Final Business Response /* (4000, 12, 2015/10/29) */
AUL has reviewed further and the A/C clutch is available seperateWith this being said the claim has been correctly adjudicated and AUL will maintain our position
thank you
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 14, 2015/10/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
AUL sucks and they will never get another dime from meSure the part in question is available separately, but it is so rarely fixed that way you have to pay extra to get the single part that you would pay less to get the parts that typically break o wear out togetherThat's so stupid I am beyond words