Basic Maintenance

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
On phone when I called in to raise the claim and followed back with them, I was mentioned that the part is still covered.  When I mentioned this to the manager, he told he shall review the recorded calls and get back to me in 2 days but it has been 15 days till date and no one has called me back. As mentioned on the policy , air conditioning system was covered and I never knew which part had a problem internal and I took it to the service center.  I dont mind if I am not covered to replace the part. At the end, because for the inspection I was charged 150$ for the inspection by the shop.Even I confirmed with the agents because the inspection cost is mentioned , if the part is covered only then I would give it to the workshop for repair. They confirmed that air conditioning system is covered. And today when I cancelled the policy, they charged me like 52$ in total for having the policy for 5 days . and they justify by saying cancellation fee of 25$ .  When I called on 9-21-2016 at 2 pm around (chicago time/central time ) , they said no cancellation fee. I am sure about this and they can check the recorded calls. They never speak of the recorded calls because of the false promises they  make. The company needs to justify on the 150 and 52 charge which is the loss incurred to me approx 200$ in total.. And because of all this fuss from 3 weeks this is really a disturbance to me . I have got important things to do. I still demand the company to give me back the loss which I incurred and pay me a compensation if possible.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
 The inspection reports clearly state that the inspectors equipment would not work with my car. I refuse to pay for those inspections and once again believe I am entitled to some type of compensation for the trouble this has caused. I have tried to be understanding but there was no attempt on their end to try to assist me in any way. They were rude and condescending every time I spoke with them. I didn't have a car for nearly a month while I was waiting on them. I have started the refund process, which of course involves more hoops to jump through. They offered a laughable half of my refund back. The inspector reported the car wasn't taken apart the second time. That is absolutely false, I had to pay out of pocket to my repair shop to have them put it back together! The picture I have attached shows the car with the downpipe's removed and access to the waste gates that are rattling.
Regards,

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. The customer filed a claim on 8/31/2016 with vehicle mileage of 64,371. The repair facility stated that the MASS AIR FLOW SENSOR has failed and needed to be replaced. ASAP authorized and paid for the repair (please see the attached payment receipt...

and invoice.) On 10/6/2016 the customer filed a second claim with the vehicle at the same repair shop. The shop now stated the engine was misfiring and needed to be repaired. ASAP sent an independent, third party inspector to view the vehicle. The inspector discovered that the mass air flow sensor, which was paid for on the prior claim, was never actually replaced. The inspection report states: "There was no failure of the mass air flow sensor and it has not been replaced. The tech had it unplugged when he was doing the compression test so when the tech was cranking the engine over on the compression test it set the mass air flow sensor code." This constitutes obvious fraud which ASAP has not reason to tolerate. As a result, due to misrepresentation, the Vehicle Service Contract has been administratively cancelled and the customer was provided a pro-rata refund in accordance with the contract guidelines.

Thank you for bringing this to the attention of ASAP.
The customer has since disputed their purchase with their credit card provider, for the full amount of their initial purchase. This was done while ASAP was in process of refunding the customer. 
It is important to note, the customer disputed their purchase, perhaps in the hope of receiving a double payment.
At this time, ASAP can no longer assist this customer. 
We request that the Revdex.com consider this case closed and resolved.

Please see the attached refund transaction receipt. As the refund has been completed, please consider this matter resolved.

COMPLAINT ID # [redacted] In response to this complaint, the consumer required repairs on the vehicle which were covered by the VSC. ASAP proceeded to ship the parts to the repair shop, and committed to pay the labor. The total cost authorized by ASAP was $207.78. The parts, for whatever reason, did...

not make it to the shop and the consumer paid for the repair. After reviewing this complaint, ASAP contacted the consumer and came to an agreement to reimburse the consumer $350.00 for the inconvenience. The reimbursement check is attached for review.

The customer purchased a Vehicle Service Contract on 11/09/2016 and reported the mileage of the vehicle to 53,000. The contract had a 30 day and 1,000 mile wait period. The contract start date was 12/9/2016 and start mileage as 54,000.On 1/09/2017 the customer filed a claim. The vehicle was towed to...

the shop due to a major internal engine failure. The shop reported the vehicle mileage on that date as 52,140, which was less than the mileage the customer reported to ASAP upon contract purchase. Due to this major misinformation, ASAP could not determine the true starting mileage of the contract.When the customer was informed of this discrepancy he requested to cancel the contract.Please find the attached refund transaction receipts showing a refund of all money paid by the customer has been issued.

This customer's complaint is noted by ASAP. Please be aware, while waiting for the refund, the customer informed ASAP that he initiated a charge-back with the credit card issuing bank. Once a customer notifies us of a pending charge-back, we are not able to provide a refund. The reason for this is...

that the customer would then receive double the amount of money from ASAP. While there is recourse ASAP can take to reacquire those funds, we must err on the side of caution and await the charge-back notification documents confirming the customer did actually dispute the charge, which was the case in this scenario.

The customer says ASAP made false statements. We did not do such a thing. Attached is telephone recording in which our agent discussed the details of the transmission issues with the repair facility. This call took place August 23, 2016. Whether or not the customer opened a claim for this issue, it was brought to our attention. We had knowledge of the transmission issue, which we informed the customer would not be covered at that time. The customer did not repair the vehicle. Also, to correct the customer, the CV boot and axle shaft are 2 separate components. There are multiple CV boots for this vehicle, the General Motors parts numbers are 88957225, 88957226, 88957230, and 25782407. The axle shaft part numbers are 88957150, 88957151, 15919079, and 15919080. The repair shop stated to ASAP the CV axle boot had a tear and the grease spread to the wheel and steering knuckle. The CV boots are not listed as covered components in the Vehicle Service Contract.

Regarding the customer's complaint, after review, please see the attached refund receipt. The customer's refund was processed on August 24th, 2016. This complaint was submitted by the customer on August 25th, 2016. We therefore respectfully request this complaint be considered resolved.

Attached is the customer's signed cancellation form agreeing to the refund amount of $788.87, as well as the refund transaction receipts confirming the completion of the refund. Please consider the matter resolved.

The customer entered two Vehicle Service Contracts with American Standard Auto Protection on 01/26/2016 and agreed to the terms and conditions by electronically signing the Vehicle Service Contract; official start date for both contracts is 4/20/2016. Vehicles: 1)      2004...

Cadillac SRX 2)      2005 Mitsubishi Galant GLS.  Claims approved for 2005 Mitsubishi Galant GLS: 1)      Window regulator– filed on 05/12/2016 2)      Water pump – filed on 08/17/2016 Claims approved for 2004 Cadillac SRX 1)      Wheel bearing assembly – filed on 03/16/2016 2)      Water pump – filed on 06/10/2016 3)      Radiator – filed on 07/06/2016   Customer towed vehicle into a repair facility on 08/23/2016, her technician then called in to initiate a claim for the Cadillac SRX stating the engine had low compression based on his findings. A representative followed up with the customer requesting that she send in maintenance records, as per her Vehicle Service Contract states, under YOUR OBLIGATIONS 3(b). (Please review attachment) The maintenance records that were sent in were incomplete based on vehicles VIN report, American Standard Auto Protection contacted customer to notify them that there was an inconsistency as they insisted that they have only been to one repair facility the entire time they have owned the vehicle. After naming the other repair facility the vehicle has been to, customer then backtracked and stated that she would gather all that she can find.  After submitting all required documentation our Authorizations department verified that the consumer did not comply with all maintenance required by General Motors. General Motors requires oil changes to be done once a year. The last oil change performed on the vehicle dates 9/27/2013. General Motors also requires 5-w30 oil to be used in the car's engine. The maintenance records indicate that 5w40, which is not recommended, was used during oil changes dated 9/27/2013, 5/17/2013, 11/13/2012, and 6/15/2012. As engine maintenance has not been performed according to manufacturer's specifications, American Standard Auto Protection cannot assist with this claim. Based on customers Vehicle Service Contract the claim was handled according to Vehicle Service Contract agreement.   Top of Form Bottom of Form   Bottom of Form

Please see the attached document which shows the customer has been returned all funds paid for the contract.

ASAP had maintained constant communication with the contract holder, and beyond the date, SINCE HIS CONTRACT WAS RELEASED BY HIM. In good faith, and at a considerable loss of money, ASAP, in good faith, entered into a Settlement & Release Agreement, which the consumer had gained benefits under this Agreement. ASAP did follow up, beyond the Agreement date, to facilitate the delivery of replacement parts. ASAP did speak with the original servicing center which replaced the first part, and they stated they would gladly replace it again, AS LONG AS THE CONSUMER UNDERSTOOD, HE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LABOR. The following day, the servicing center communicated by email, stating THEY NO LONGER WOULD PERFORM SERVICES FOR THE CONSUMER. No reason given. ASAP indicated to the consumer we would facilitate the exchange for the replacement unit through the ASAP Vendor. At this time, the consumer is stating his current repair facility does not want to install a supplied part. The consumer can choose to go to another repair facility. ASAP points out, and as it has done so with the consumer, the Settlement Agreement which he signed, and returned an ORIGINAL, NOTARIZED copy, is his Agreement to terminated the Service Contract. ASAP has gone to great measures to assist the consumer. At this time, ASAP can no longer offer assistance, as the consumer, is no longer a client of ASAP, and has been fully compensated.

COMPLAINT ID # [redacted] In response to this complaint, as you will see from documentation to be provided, the American Standard Auto Protection telecommunications systems were down due to technical difficulties from the telecom carrier. ASAP posted information on the website regarding this...

issue.

Please see the attached refund transaction receipt as confirmation of the refund having been issued. The refund was issued prior to ASAP receiving this complaint.

On November 15, 2016 the customer purchased a Vehicle Service Contract. The vehicle mileage at the time of purchase was 98,794. The contract had a 30 day and 1,000 mile wait period before it would become active (the start date was December 14, 2016 and 99,794 miles).
On January 23, 2017 the...

customer had the vehicle towed to a repair shop. The vehicle mileage on that date was 102,647. The shop contacted ASAP stating the vehicle needed a new clutch assembly for the transmission (which is not the transmission assembly), a new transmission assembly, as well as extensive engine repairs. The attached contract signed by the customer states ASAP does not cover any known or unknown pre-existing conditions. The contract was active for 40 days and 2,853 miles. It's not mechanically probable for all of those parts to fail in such a short time period.
as a resolution to this complaint, The customer requested a full refund. The customer has already signed and agreed to a pro-rated refund. However, as a good will gesture, ASAP has refunded the contract in full (please see attached). Please consider this matter resolved.

The customer contacted  ASAP 11/8/2016 to inform he will be taking the vehicle in for repair. The customer dropped the vehicle at the shop on 11/9/2016. The shop did not submit the diagnosis to ASAP until 12/2/2016. The customer and shop were contacted within 4 hours of that time with the claim...

results. Some repairs were authorized and some were declined; all according to the contract terms accepted by the customer.

Please find the attached refund transaction receipt as confirmation the customer's refund has been issued.

The consumer initiated a claim with ASAP warranty on the date of 9/26/2017 stating the check engine light had come on and the vehicle was shutting off when accelerating. ASAP received a claim from Mercedes Benz of Bloomfield Hills on the date of 9/28/17 stating the vehicle was DRIVEN in with a...

concern of hesitation and rough jerking upon acceleration. ASAP once the claim was received immediately requested for the consumer to submit maintenance records which is indicated on the consumer’s contract in order to get a better understanding of the vehicle and what maintenance had been performed. It was not until the date of 10/11/17 that all the documents requested were received on our end which is the cause of the delay in moving forward with the claim. The documents were all reviewed on the very same day they were received and we then proceeded to schedule an inspector to verify the concerns.   The inspection report when it was received on 10/13/17 indicated there was an intermittent hesitation on acceleration.  The vehicle was driveable as it was test driven for a total of 4 miles, there was no transmission codes or any indication of a failure of the transmission. It is also worth mentioning the customer brought the vehicle into the shop for diagnosis on 9/28/2017 with 123,969 miles and returned it for inspection on 10/12/2017 with 124,760 miles. This is a clear indication the customer continued to the drive vehicle 791 miles DURING the claim process- a claim which requested a new transmission as the current unit was supposedly disabled. ASAP contacted the shop and customer on the date of 10/13/17 and informed “There was no mechanical breakdown of the transmission as defined in the contract.” There was also a light indicating maintenance as extremely over due on a maintenance that may have a direct connection to the occurrence of the symptom the customer was experiencing. We at ASAP have done our due diligence to address the claim and concerns as they arose.