Sign in

C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc Reviews (345)

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
*** ***
I have jeep grand Cherokee with a bad heater
core that they will not fixi have ball joints and others things that
are broke too and all they said they will give me for those repairs are
and the mechanic said it will cost over to repairfor example
a ball joint they give you is to fix itto me this is a
advertisingi would not recommend them to any onethey do not fix your
car they just take your money and runit was not prior to the contract affected this company is a scam I would not recommend it to no one they will not fix my car what is wrong with you guy is just about money Revdex.com

I am in receipt of your letter dated January 19, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on October 27, On that same date she also applied for a CARS
Value Plus Service Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on October 29, (See attached Service Contract)On January 14, 2015, at 4:p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing mechanical issuesSince the vehicle was not at the repair facility, we advised the repair facility to open a new claim when the vehicle was presentCARS then closed the claimOn the following day, January 15, at 2:p.mthe same repair facility telephoned CARS to open a claim on behalf of the customer’s vehicleThe repair facility advised that the vehicle was experiencing dash cluster, fuel level sensor, headlight, thermostat, fuel tank pressure sensor, rear shocks, alternator and battery issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityThat same date at 3:p.m., we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract as follows: We could supply an alternator for $and the thermostat for $We would also allow $for fluidMitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer’s Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleThe total value of the claim was $170.14, once the deductible was appliedWe then advised Jimmy that CARS was not able to assist with the repair of the dash cluster, fuel level sensor, headlight, fuel tank pressures sensor, rear shocks and battery, because some of the repairs are non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract and some of the repairs (i.eheadlights, rear shocks and battery) are maintenance items and all would be the customer's responsibility to repair.On January 19, at 1:p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer would take the money allowance for the claimAn authorization number was then given for the repairOnce we receive the final invoice verifying that the repairs are completed, CARS will pay the claim in accordance to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.By the customer's signature on her Value Plus Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of her Service ContractIt is stated in the service contract: "Covered Components: "Coverage limited to above components.” and "under Term and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a): "Components and Expenses Not Covered: Components not listed regardless of failure.” The dash cluster, fuel level sensor, headlight, fuel tank pressure sensor, rear shocks and battery are not listed for coverage; therefore, they are the responsibility of the customer to repair.Under the customer's Service Contract, we were not required to cover the full cost of the repairSaid service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what components are specifically covered and the customer’s financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, and taxes.Therefore, CARS was correct when we were only able to offer assistance for the alternator and thermostat for all the reasons stated above; therefore, CARS is not able to assist with the remaining repairs pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract.Additionally, the customer states in her complaint that she is not happy that she was not given any rental benefits, and also is requesting a refund of her Service ContractCARS is regulated on refund policies by each state that CARS conducts business in and we strictly adhere in those states where their statutes supersede our cancellation provisionsNo state statute in Michigan requires CARS to refund service contracts; therefore, the customer is not entitled to any refund at this time.The customer's service contract states under Terms and conditions at Paragraph (a through d): CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: "There is no credit for early termination except if the vehicle is declared a total loss by the carrier insuring the vehicle or if the vehicle is repossessed by the lien holder as statedC.A.R.Sshall refund to the dealer a portion of the amount received by C.A.R.Sfor your Service Contract on a monthly prorated basis, less a service fee (not to exceed $50.00), as long as no claims have been made against the vehicleIf a vehicle is altered or modified after purchase and if a claim has been made or paid, the Service Contract is cancelled and no refund shall be issued; and If the Service Contract is financed, you have the right to cancel the contract within the first days by providing a written request to cancel for a full refund of the amount received by C.A.R.Sfor the Service Contract, less any claims paidThe refund shall be paid to the lien holderAfter days, you have the right to cancel the Service Contract at anytime by providing a written request to cancelThe lien holder will be refunded a prorated refund of the amount received by C.A.R.Sfor the Service Contract, less a service fee (not to exceed $50.00), less any claims paid."Also, the customer’s service contract states under: "COVERED COMPONENTS: RENTAL BENEFITS: The Service Contract Holder will reimbursed $for each eight hours of Mitchell OnDemand labor guide to repair or replace the covered component..." Here, since Mitchell OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should only take hours to complete, the customer is not entitled to any rental benefits pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

RE: COMPLAINT ID #*** DODGE VIN (Last 8): *** OUR FILE NO.: *** Dear Ms*** I received your letter of April 10, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: On January 23,
2015, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle and on that same date, the customer applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (Months/4,Miles)The same was accepted with payment by CARS on January 28, (the attached "Service Contract”)The customer has Service Contract coverage through April 28, On April 7, at 9:a.m., a claim was called in by a repair facility on behalf of the customer's vehicle, advising that there were transmission issuesOn April 8, after the repair facility provided its cause of failure and extent of damage, CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply a transmission for $Mitchell’s OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer's Service Contract pays up to $per hourTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $CARS could supply the transmission as stated above and pay $toward labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer's choiceCARS advised the repair facility to contact the customer, advise him of his options and contact CARS with his decisionOn April 9, at 9:a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer wanted to take the money for the allowance for the transmission repairOn that same date CARS issued an authorization number for the repairThis authorization number is valid for daysOnce we receive the final invoice from the repair facility indicating that the repairs are completed, CARS will pay the claim in the amount of $as stated aboveBy the customer’s signature on his Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read and understood its Terms and ConditionsThe customer's Service Contract states under the Terms and Conditions: “WARRANTY CLAIM PROCEDURE: C.A.R.S has the right to select and supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs.” When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement transmission we used the cost of the transmission to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt was the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleHere, the customer chose to take the cash allowance of $rather than to have CARS supply the transmission for the repairAny difference in part price that CARS could have supplied and the cost of the replacement parts that the repair facility is charging is the sole responsibility of the customerAdditionally, nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with rebuilt parts when replacing/repairing a failed componentCARS’ service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers' vehicles and do not provide "all-inclusive" coverageTherefore, pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and his financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I am in receipt of your letter dated November 24, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on October 6, On that same date the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus
Service Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on October 15, (See attached Service Contract)On October 30, at 3:p.m., a repair facility telephoned CARS advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing rear differential and transmission issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityOn November 5, 2014, at 9:a.mand at 10:p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the cause of failure was wear and tear to the customer's vehicleWe advised the repair facility that we needed to know the exact cause of failure to the customer's vehicleOn November 5, at 11:a.m., the repair facility advised that the seal in the overdrive drum failed creating a loss of pressureThe clutches were burnt and the rear differential spider gears were chippedThe pinion seal had a slight leakThere were no signs of overheatingAfter the repair facility gave CARS the cause of failure and after we received the repair facility’s estimate for the repair for the customer's vehicle, CARS determined that an independent inspection of the customer's vehicle was necessary to verify the cause of failure and extent of damageThe independent inspection occurred on November 10, During the inspection of the customer’s vehicle the independent inspector found the customer's vehicle to be altered/modified with oversized tiresOn November 10, at 1:p.m., CARS advised the repair facility that the customer's claim was denied and his service contract denied due to oversized tires on the vehicleWe then explained that the customer would eligible for a full refund of the amount CARS received from the selling dealer if the customer signed a General ReleaseOn November 11, at 9:a.m., the customer telephoned CARS and spoke to our customer service managerOur customer service manager went over the terms and conditions of the service contract and advised that altered/modified vehicles void the service contractCARS also went over the General Release with the customerDuring this telephone call our customer service manager had to warn the customer that this was a professional telephone call when the customer began to use inappropriate languageA General Release (see attached) for the full amount that CARS received from the selling dealer was sent to the customer on November 11, for his notarized signatureAs of said date, CARS has not received the signed and notarized General Release back from the customerUpon our receipt of the fully executed and notarized General Release, CARS will send the refund check to the selling dealerSince CARS' service contract are sold wholesale to the dealers, by sending the refund check to the selling dealer, this allows the dealer to refund his portion of the monies to the customerCARS believed that the customer's vehicle met our eligibility requirements when the vehicle was approved by CARS on October 15, It was not until the processing of the October 30, claim that CARS became aware of the alterations/modifications to the customer's vehicleThe alterations/modifications (i.eoversize tires) of the customer’s vehicle are not according to the manufacturer's specificationsIn addition, the alterations/modifications can affect the way the vehicle performs and also can cause undue mechanical problems with the vehicleBy the customer's signature on his service contract, he acknowledged that he read and understood the terms and conditions contained thereinIt is also stated under terms and conditions at Paragraph 1(d) and Paragraph 2(f) and 2(d): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Vehicles that are modified or altered from the original manufacturer's specifications, including but not limited to the following modifications: frame, suspension or body lift kits, wheels/tires (not to OEM specifications), emission system, exhaust system, engine, transmission and drive axle, regardless of when modifications or alterations were performed." Also, "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: "Altered or modified vehicles are not covered and shall also void the service contract." Additionally, "We reserve the right to reject or cancel any application or Service Contract for cause as determined by CARS." To reiterate, it was not until the processing of the October 30, claim that CARS became aware of the alterations/modifications to the vehicle were made by the customer after the date of vehicle purchaseAs stated above, the alterations/modifications to the customer's vehicle are not according to the manufacturer's specifications and can affect the way the vehicle performs and also can cause undue mechanical problems with the vehicleCARS relies on the information provided to us by the dealers and/or repair facilities, since we cannot inspect every vehicle that has a service contract with usOnce notified of a modified/altered vehicle, CARS has the right to cancel the service contract immediatelyThe customer’s service is void and the customer does not have service coverage under any of CARS service contractsWhen a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

RE: COMPLAINT ID #***NISSAN ALTIMA VIN (Last 8): *** OUR FILE NO.: ***Dear Ms***:I am in receipt of your letter dated April 27, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: On February 20, 2015, the customer purchased
the above- referenced vehicleOn that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (Months/4,Miles] and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on March 2, (the attached "Service Contract”).On April 17, at 2:p.m., we received a telephone call from the customer advising us that her vehicle was experiencing intake cylinder issuesWe then reviewed with the customer CARS' claim procedures, the customer's service coverage and rental benefits.On April 23, at 4:p.m., CARS returned a voice message from the customerWe advised the customer that CARS was waiting for the repair facility to get back to us with their findingsWe again reviewed our claim procedures, the customer's service coverage and rental benefits with herThe customer was unhappy about the rental benefits and a customer service representative advised that CARS service contracts are limited in their coverage and emailed an outline of coverage to her.On April 24, at 1:p.m., we again received a telephone call from the customer advising us that her vehicle was experiencing intake cylinder issuesWe then reviewed our claim procedures, the customer's service coverage and the rental benefits with her.On April 24, at 1:p.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising us the head gasket was leaking from the coolant port on the #cylinder and coolant was getting into the combustion chamberThe chamber head was warped CARS advised the repair facility to fax the estimate to us for review.On April 24, at 4:p.m., after CARS received and reviewed the estimate from the repair facility and had the opportunity to check on the availability of parts, we then went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the head set for $123.63, bolts for $62.41, and pay $towards the deckingProDemand stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer’s service contract pays up to $per hourTherefore, total labor covered was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $761.04, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer’s choiceThe repair facility advised CARS that the customer would take the cash allowance towards the repair of her choiceWe then gave the repair facility an authorization number to begin the repairs to the customer’s vehicle.By the customer's signature on her Power Train Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that she read, understood, and agreed to the terms and conditions of the her Service ContractThe customer’s service contract states under terms and conditions at Paragraph 3(f): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: CARS has the option to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs.” When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement parts we use the cost of the parts to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleHere, the repair facility advised CARS that the customer chose to take the cash allowance to assist with the repair of her vehicle.The rental benefits of the customer’s Service Contract states: "RENTAL BENEFITS The Service Contract Holder will be reimbursed $for each eight hours of ProDemand labor guide time to repair or replace the covered component with a maximum benefit of $per claim, if proof of rental is provided with an authorized claimDown time, regardless of reason, is not included.” ProDemand Labor Guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete; therefore, the customer is entitled $of rental benefits under her Service ContractThe customer needs to submit a proof of rental to CARS to be reimbursed the $she is entitled under her Service Contract.The Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract states at (m): "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: C.A.R.Swill not be responsible for any time lost, any inconvenience caused by the loss of use Your vehicle, the quality of the repair by the repair facility or for any other incidental or consequential damages You may have." As you can see from the above information, CARS replied to the repair facility in a timely mannerCARS received the final repair estimate from the repair facility on Friday, April 24, and on that same day, we provided options to the repair facility for the customer's decision on how CARS could assist with April 23, claim.The customer's vehicle has service coverage through June 2, CARS will review any claims opened on behalf of the customer’s vehicle and if the failures are covered pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer’s service contract, CARS will pay accordingly.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,*** ** ***General Counsel

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have read the response from C.A.R.Sand I have noticed some statements made by them that are inaccurateIn the response; in paragraph 4; it states that "Here, the engine CARS could supply has fewer miles than the engine currently in the customer's vehicle." I spoke with *** (with CARS) and he stated to me that he would not give me the mileage on the $motor and he would not give the information on where the motor was coming from(that he did not have to) The motor that was found by the auto mechanic shop was priced at $1,and that particular motor had 90,miles on it and was coming from a business that the auto mechanic shop uses (that has a one year warranty)At no point in time; has anyone from CARS attempted to contact me in regards to the plan for repairs on my vehicle
I am unhappy that they will only cover $towards a motor; when I have looked at many places and have been unable to locate a motor for less than $1,They also state that "they have the right to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs." I have purchased this warranty for $and deserve to be treated as fair as possibleBeing told; "We do not have to tell you the mileage and location from where the motor is coming from" is not acceptableThis is what I was told by *** and the auto mechanic shop was told this as well; by ***
I want my vehicle repaired and be in; at least; as good of a shape as it was prior to the break downI do not feel this is acceptableIt also states in their response; they will supply the engine for $and pay $towards labor or will pay $1,towards my choiceI have NEVER recieved a call from them offering anythingCommunication has been between myself and auto mechanic shop; of which was told to locate an engine and then they were told that CARS would supply one for $875. Chris was not professional; at all; when I placed a call to him.
In the response; it also states that the repair facility charges $per hour for labor and that they are charging a flat rate of $1,I placed a call to *** auto mechanic shop; and spoke to ***; that has been the "go between" for myself and CARSShe reported to me that; at no time; did she quote "flat rate of $1,000"I am $in the hole; at this point, for tear down charges that *** (with CARS) authorized
In order to settle this; I want the $1,+ $for charges that CARS authorizedAs mentioned above; there are several discrepencies in the letter from *** ** *** (general Counsel); in regards to statements made by them to the auto mechanic shop and to myselfThis is not good customer service; considering I have paid them $and their facts are not accurate
Regards,
*** ***

I am in receipt of your letter dated October 7, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: On December 11, 2013, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicleOn that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Power Train
Service Contract (Months/15,Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on December 15, (the attached "Service Contract")
On October 6, at 11:a.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising us that the customer was experiencing transmission issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility
Later that same day, after CARS received and reviewed the estimate from the repair facility, we went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the transmission for $1,Mitchell's OnDemand stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer’s service contract pays up to $per hourTherefore, total labor covered was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $1,830.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $1,towards the repair of the customer's choiceWe then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer's decision
On October 7, at 11:a.m., we went over the claim allowance with the customerThe customer stated that we should be paying for a new transmission for her vehicleWe then went over the terms and conditions of the service contractThe customer then stated we were a "rip-off' and hung up on our claims adjustor
On October 8, at 1:p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer would like the supplied transmissionWe then gave the repair facility an authorization number to begin repairs to the customer's vehicle
?By the customer’s signature on her Power Train Plus Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that she read, understood, and agreed to the terms and conditions of her service contractThe customer’s service contract clearly states under terms and conditions at Paragraph 3(f): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: CARS has the right to select and supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs.” When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement parts we use the cost of the parts to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt is the customer’s decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleAny supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working conditionNowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed componentIn this instance, the replacement transmission for the customer’s vehicle will have less mileage (50,miles] than the transmission (89,miles) that is being replaced
The service contract also states under terms and conditions at Paragraph (b): "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: Coverage begins the day this application is received with payment and approved by CARS and will last for the time period or mileage indicated, whichever occurs first, so long as you own the vehicle." The customer's vehicle has service coverage through December 16, or when the odometer reaches 92,miles, whichever occurs firstThe warranty on any supplied parts ends with the expiration of the service contract
Pursuant to the customer's service contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and the customer’s financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

RE: COMPLAINT ID #*** NISSAN XTERRA VIN (Last 8): *** OUR FILE NO.: *** Dear Ms*** I am in receipt of your letter dated January 23, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our
records, the customer purchased the above- referenced vehicle on November 19, and on that same date she applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (Months/4,Miles)The customer’s Service Contract was received by CARS and approved with payment on December 2, (See attached "Service Contract")On December 5, at 3:p.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing transmission issuesWe then went over our claim procedures in detail with the repair facilityOn December 9, at 11:a.m., the repair facility advised us that the torque converter came apart internally and shot metal shavings through the unit damaging the valve body and the clutchesThe repair facility advised that they would send an estimate to CARSAfter receiving the information provided by the repair facility, CARS determined that an independent inspection of the customer's vehicle was necessary to verify the cause of failure and extent of damage to the customer’s vehicleThe independent inspection occurred on December 11, The independent inspector found that the clutches were dark, overheated and material was missing from themThe valve body showed signs of metal contaminationThe independent inspector had the repair facility's technician drain residual fluid from the torque converterThe drained fluid was milky in color and consistent with coolant contaminationThe independent inspector examined the cooling system and found that the coolant was in good condition and there were no signs of any intermixThe radiator looked to be brand new and was not a Nissan radiatorThere were no signs of any impact damage or external leaksThe independent inspector found that the failure was consistent with a radiator/transmission cooler failure which resulted in coolant contamination to the transmission and subsequent damageThe radiator replacement and the internal transmission failure pre-existed the customer's purchase of the vehicle on November 19, On December 11, CARS advised both the repair facility and the customer that we were unable to assist with the December 5, transmission claim pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service ContractThe failure to the customer's vehicle was caused by previous coolant contamination due to a previous improper repairBy the customer's signature on her Power Train Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions contained thereinThe service contract states at Paragraph (i): “COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage resulting from any previous improper repair” is not coveredBased on the findings of the independent inspector, CARS determined that the transmission failure was caused by an improper previous repair due to the transmission and torque converter not being flushed when the radiator was replaced prior to the customer purchasing the vehicle on November 19, The failure of the radiator/transmission cooler caused coolant contamination to the transmission and subsequent damage to the customer's vehicleThe radiator replacement and internal transmission failure pre-exist the customer's purchase of the vehicle on November 19, Pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and your financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductibleCARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract and therefore, we are unable to assist with the December 5, claim for the reasons stated aboveThe customer has Service Contract coverage on her vehicle through March 2, Should her vehicle incur future mechanical problems, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under the service contractIf the failed component is covered, CARS will authorize and pay the claim in accordance to the terms and conditions of the Service ContractWhen a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell, and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Thank you I will contact the dealer
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
After reading their response I am appalled at the out right lies that have been stated I cannot dispute what was stated to the repair facility, however the conversation that *** (the adjuster) , and I had was no where even close to the statements that were made that day I asked why a new transmission was not being supplied because of the facility not offering any type of warranty on used parts His reply (***) it is not cost effective for our company We never discussed any other subject but that issue I then said "wow, some customer service, cost effective"
My concern is a used part that offers no kind of warranty Not labor, deductibles, or any other associated fees that come with this repair This was the warranty that was offered with the vehicle, I did not go out and seek this As for me accepting the transmission that was offered, I HAD NO OTHER OPTION I have to have a vehicle to get and back and forth
As a customer of theirs, and even after speaking to the repair facility they had NEVER spoken to any other warranty company that was cheap in replacing a customers parts Bottom line is this company knows my warranty runs out on December 16th or when I reach a certain amount of miles This has been the only claim I have ever made towards this company, and I feel as if they simply just do not care about their customers Because if they did they would have made the decision to replace the transmission with a new one, or place an extended warranty on their used part Even on their own website they advertise that their parts are warranted So why is this not being honored by their company? I have attached an actual picture from their own website
In close, I never said that this company was a rip off I feel like that, but I never stated it What I said was " I will be contacting the Revdex.com" He (***) chuckled and hung up on me I am sure that the conversation was recorded and if so I will sign any document if needed to release such conversation
Regards,
*** ***

received your letter dated October 6, 2014, enclosing the customer's concerns contained the above-referenced consumer complaintOur records indicate that on September 6, 2014, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle and on that same date, she also applied for a CARS Power Train
Service Contract (Months/4,Miles), which was accepted with payment by CARS on September 10, (the attached "Service Contract”)
A mechanical claim was opened on September 22, at 10:a.m., by a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing engine issuesThe repair facility advised that their shop’s labor rate was $per hourCARS claim procedures were then thoroughly reviewed with the repair facility
After CARS received the estimate for repairs on September 24, 2014, CARS went over with the repair facility the amount we could authorize for the claim pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract as follows: CARS could supply an engine for $Mitchell's OnDemand Labor Guide states that the repair should take hours and the customer’s service contract pays up to $per hour; therefore, total labor allowed was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $1,and we could supply the engine as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $1,towards the repair of the customer's choice
That same day at 4:p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer wanted to use our money allowance for the engine repairsWe then provided the repair facility with an authorization number for the repairWhen CARS receives the final repair invoice evidencing that the repairs to the customer's vehicle are completed, CARS will pay the repair facility the amount of $1,as stated above and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer’s service contract
At this time, I would also like to clarify that the Power Train Service Contract that the customer purchased on her vehicle is the most basic service contract that CARS offers and is limited in coverage time and miles, labor rate of $per hour, deductible of $100.00, covered components and the responsibility of the customer for various other charges not covered under the service contract (i.etear down, diagnosis, taxes, fluids, filters, difference in labor rates and time, etc.)Therefore, CARS is not required to cover the full cost of the repair
In summary, the customer's service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the teardown, diagnosis, filters, fluids, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductibleAccordingly, CARS service contracts are to assist with covered mechanical failures; however, they are not intended to pay 100% for customer's repairsHere, the repair facility’s labor rate that the customer chose to repair her vehicle was $and her service contract pays up to $per hour; therefore, any difference in labor charges rate and time are the sole responsibility of the customerThe customer is also responsible for any and all costs relating to the teardown and diagnosis of the vehicleHowever, after a claim is authorized by CARS the labor time allowable for the repair does include the cost to replace and repairAdditionally, any difference in the engine price that CARS could have supplied and the cost of the replacement engine that the repair facility is charging the customer, is the sole responsibility of the customer
As you can see from all the above information, CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations regarding the customer’s recent engine claim, which will be paid by CARS in the total amount of $1,once we receive the final invoice evidencing that the repairs are completed, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer’s Power Train Service Contract
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I am in receipt of your letter dated March 10, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer’s additional concerns and respond as follows: On February 25, at 8:a.m., CARS provided the repair facility, chosen by the customer to repair his vehicle, of the estimated arrival dates for the intake manifold and rack and pinionIf the customer was not satisfied with the length of time to process and ship the parts, he had the opportunity to take the cash allowance.Our parts suppliers arrange to have our parts shipped to repair facilities throughout the country in the best conditions the parts can affordably be shippedIt is very cost prohibited to ship parts overnight to repair facilities in the thirty-one (31] states, CARS currently does businessWe make every attempt to obtain parts from suppliers as close to the repair facility as possible to lessen the delivery time.Upon receipt of the customer’s additional concerns, on March 11, 2015, a CARS claim manager telephoned the repair facility to assure that the supplied parts had been delivered to the repair facilityThe repair facility advised the claim manager that the supplied parts had been at the repair facility and the delays to the repair of the customer's vehicle were the result of waiting on parts that the repair facility ordered from GermanyFurthermore, for the last week, the repair facility did not have a rack to perform the necessary repairs to the customer's vehicleThe repair facility told CARS that they hoped to have the repairs completed by the end of business today, March 11, 2015.CARS works with suppliers that we trust to provide good, working, quality parts to our customersTo reiterate, the supplied intake manifold and the rack and pinion that CARS selected for the customer’s vehicle are pursuant to the terms and conditions and covered through the customer's Service Contract's expiration date of January 16, 2019.If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,*** ** ***

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
CARS response simply stated the transaction background but did not address any of my concerns regarding the safety of the used parts to be installed in my vehicle I understand the parts warranty but my concerns are beyond thatPlease refer back to my original message and try to answer my questions as part of the resolution processI need these answered for my fileNone of my questions were addressed at allCARS put yourselves in your customer's shoes and think about the value of timeHow would you feel not having a vehicle for a week or so and have to take care of your family at the same time with only one vehicle that won't even fit everybody? Is same day or next day delivery too much to give to your customers as a way of practicing honest business? You did not provide a resolution at all but just stated a scripted and generic response to Revdex.com.
*** ***

I would like C.A.R.S protection plus to cover the entire bill of putting in the engine and covering everything to make sure the engine will be good and last in the ***I mean I feel as if I purchase a warranty that they should cover whatever breaks down on that vehicle as long as it is covered in the contractand it isIt says that it covers any lubricated part in that carThe engine is a lubricated partI have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Regards,
*** ***

I am in receipt of your letter dated October 1, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on March 26, On that same date the customer applied for a CARS
Value Plus Service Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles)CARS received with payment and approved the customer’s service contract on March 26, (See attached Service Contract)
Since the inception the customer's Service Contract, three (3) claims have been opened as follows:
FIRST CLAIM: On December 26, at 11:a.m., in a recorded telephone call, a repair
facility advised that the customer's vehicle was experiencing right CV axle, intermediate shaft/carrier bearings, left front wheel bearing, control arm/ball joint and CV boot issues due to the customer’s vehicle being involved in an accidentAfter reviewing the estimate provided by the repair facility, CARS telephoned the customer and advised that pursuant to the terms and conditions his service contract, we were unable to offer assistanceCARS explained that any issues that result from an accident are not covered by the service contract and advised him to call his vehicle insurance carrierThe claim was then closed
SECOND CLAIM: On February 4, 2014, at 3:p.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing front axle issuesThe repair facility advised that both front axles were leaking greaseNo verified failure was found by the repair facility in regard to the front axles other than the boots were leaking greaseWe then advised that pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract, we would be unable to assist with the claims because the boots are non-covered components under the service contract
THIRD CLAIM: On August 13, 2014, at 10:a.m., we received a telephone call from a repair
facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing right front axle, left front wheel bearing, left wheel, tire and belt tensioner issuesWe advised the repair facility that we would need receipts from previous repairs to review since the customer's vehicle was involved in an accident in December of We also advised that we were unable to assist with the belt tensioner repair because the claim allowance was $which was less than the $deductibleThat was the last communication that CARS had with the repair facilityAs of said date, we have never received the requested receiptsAfter thirty (30) days without any contact from the repair facility or the customer, the claim was closed by CARS
Please be advised that by the customer’s signature on his Value Plus Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions contained thereinThe customer’s service contract states under the terms and conditions at (k): "COMPONENTS AND
EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage from fire and/or accident, regardless of the cause." On
December 26, in a recorded telephone call, the repair facility advised that the customer's vehicle was experiencing right CV axle, intermediate shaft/carrier bearings, left front wheel bearing, control arm/ball joint and CV boot issues due to the customer’s vehicle being involved in an accident
Furthermore, it is stated under terms and conditions at Paragraph (t): “PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: You must retain all vehicle maintenance/repair records for review at the request of CARS.” CARS requested the repair receipts associated with the December 26, claim; however, the requested repair receipts were never provided
In addition, under the customer's Service Contract, we are not required to cover the full cost of the repairSaid service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and his financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible
If the customer is willing to provide receipts from previous repairs to his vehicle for our review and if the issues listed on the August 13, claim have not yet been repaired, the customer should open a new claim on behalf of his vehicleAfter CARS reviews the findings of the repair facility and reviews the repair receipts, CARS will then be able to determine if any assistance is available for the repair of the customer’s vehicle
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I am in receipt of your recent email and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on June 25, and on that same date she applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles)Her Service Contract was received by CARS
and approved with payment on June 28, (See attached “Service Contract")Since the inception of the customer's Service Contract three (3) mechanical claims were opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle as follows: FIRST CLAIM: On February 18, at 2:p.ma repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing front wheel bearing issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityDuring the processing of the claim we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility and the customer as follows: We could supply both the front bearings and seals for $Mitchell’s OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take hours to complete, and the customer’s Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $82.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer's choiceOn February 18, at 4:p.m., during CARS telephone call with the customer to go over the claim allowance, the customer advised CARS to cancel the claimThe claim was then closedSECOND CLAIM: On September 9, at 9:a.ma repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing transmission issuesWe then went over our claims procedures with the repair facilityDuring the processing of the claim we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility and the customer as follows: We could supply the transmission for $1,CARS would authorize $towards fluids for the repair of the vehicleMitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take hours to complete, and the customer’s Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $1,692.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor and $towards fluids or pay $1,towards the repair of the customer’s choiceThe repair facility was to get back to CARS’ with the customer's decisionOn September 18, at 9:a.m., the repair facility advised that the customer would like CARS to supply the transmissionWe then gave the repair facility an authorization number to begin repairs to the customer's vehiclePursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, on September 25, 2014, CARS paid the repair facility in the amount of $via credit card and on October 14, 2014, CARS paid our parts supplier $1,via checkThe claim was then closedTHIRD CLAIM: On February 2, at 2:p.mthe repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing engine issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityOn February 20, at 10:a.mthe repair facility advised CARS that the #rod bearing had failedOn February 26, CARS received the estimate for the repair of the customer's vehicle from the repair facilityOn February 27, at 9:a.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the motor for $CARS would authorize $towards fluids for the repair of the vehicleMitchell’s OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take hours to complete, and the customer’s Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $1,150.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor and $towards fluids or pay $1,towards the repair of the customer's choiceThe repair facility was to get back to CARS’ with the customer's decisionCARS advised the repair facility that the motor had 110,miles on itCARS further advised the repair facility that timing belt is a non-covered component under the customer's Service Contract; however, it would be in the best interest of the customer's vehicle if it would be replaced during this repair since the vehicle would already be torn downOn March 2, at 2:p.m., the customer advised CARS that we should cover all the costs associated with the repair of her vehicleWe reviewed her service coverage with herThe customer was not happy with her coverageAs of March 2, 2015, CARS has not yet heard back from the repair facility with the customer's decisionWe cannot guarantee that the engine that was quoted to the repair facility on February 27, is still availableOur suppliers’ inventories change dailyBy the customer’s signature on her Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to its Terms and ConditionsThe customer’s Service Contract states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph (f) "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES CARS has the right to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs.” When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement parts we used the cost of the parts to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleAny supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working conditionNowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed componentThe Service Contract states under labor: “The authorized time for a repair shall be based on the Mitchell OnDemand labor guideThe hourly labor rate will be the repair facility's rate up to $per hourShould your repair facility's rate exceed this amount, you are responsible for the difference.” When the claim was called in by the repair facility chosen by the customer to repair your vehicle, the repair facility advised us that the repair facility's labor rate was $dollars per hourPursuant to the terms and conditions of the service contract the customer is responsible for the differenceIt also states at Paragraph 3(c) "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: A proper diagnosis shall include tear-down to the point of component failure, performed bv the repair facility, to determine the cause of failure and the extent of damageYou are responsible for all charges relating to the tear-down and diagnosis of the vehicle." We include teardown to the point of component failure in our diagnostics in order for CARS to determine if the failed component is covered and the tear-down is the customer's responsibilityCARS’ service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers' vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive” coverageTherefore, pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and the customer's financial responsibility for the tear-down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductibleAssuming the quoted engine is still available, CARS is willing to assist with the replacement of the engine in the amount of $1,in accordance to the Terms and Conditions of your Service ContractTherefore, CARS is not able to provide the customer with any further monetary assist towards the repairs of her vehicle for all the reasons stated aboveWhen a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I am in receipt of your letter dated October 22, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On May 20, 2013, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicleOn that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (
Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on May 24, (the attached “Service Contract”)
On October 22, at 2:p.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising us that the customer was experiencing radiator issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility
Later that same day, CARS went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the radiator for $We would also authorize $for fluids for the repairMitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer’s service contract paid up to $per hourTherefore, total labor covered was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $152.59, and we could supply the parts and assist with the cost of fluids as stated above; however, we would be unable to assist with labor because the labor cost was less than the $deductibleWe then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer's decision
On October 23, at 9:a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer chose to have the radiator shipped to the repair facilityWe again advised the repair facility that since CARS was supplying the radiator and the labor was less than the $deductible, the customer was responsible for all other charges
By the customer's signature on his Value Plus Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read, understood, and agreed to the terms and conditions of his service contractThe customer's service contract states under terms and conditions at Paragraph 3(f): “SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: CARS has the right to select and supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs.” When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement part we use the cost of the part to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleHere, the supplied part is new and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract, covered through the service contract expiration date of May 24,
Additionally, the service contract states under the terms and conditions at Paragraph 2Q): "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: CARS will arrange for payment of the amount of the authorized repair, less related charges not covered by the Service Contract, less a $deductible per claim." Here, the customer chose to have CARS supply the radiator; therefore, the cost of labor was less than the $deductible
Pursuant to the customer's service contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and his financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible
For the reasons stated above, CARS is unable to offer any further assistance for the October 22, radiator claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicleTo reiterate, the radiator that CARS selected for the customer's vehicle is new and pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract, covered through the service contract expiration date of May 24,
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I received your letter of April 15, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaintI would like to respond in the following manner: On February 10, 2014, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle and on that same date, the customer applied for a CARS Ultimate Plus Service
Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles)The same was accepted with payment by CARS on February 13, (the attached "Service Contract”)On April 14, at 10:a.m., a claim was called in by a repair facility on behalf of the customer's vehicle, advising that there were rear drive shaft and fuel tank issuesDuring the initial processing of the claim the repair facility advised in a recorded telephone call: "Not able to pull his mileage, because his odometer does not work...Was not able to access scanner but couldn't pull up ...instrument cluster lights up, but as far as readouts, none of stuff lights up.” Based upon the information provided by the repair facility, and pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customers' Service Contract, CARS was unable to offer any assistance with the customer's claimThe customer acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions of his Ultimate Plus Service ContractThe customer's Service Contract states: "TERMS AND CONDITIONS at 2.(e)PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: An inoperative odometer, and/or odometer display, shall void the Service Contract without refund.” Here as stated above, the repair facility advised us in a recorded call that the customer’s odometer was not working and no mileage could be displayed; therefore, CARS was correct when we were unable to offer any assistance with the mechanical claim and also cancel the customer’s service contractCARS relies on the information provided by our repair facilities, since we are unable to inspect each and every vehicle that has an open mechanical claim.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,*** * ***General Counsel

I am in receipt of your letter dated January 30, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on November 20, and on that same date she applied for a CARS Value Plus Service
Contract (Months/Unlimited Miles)The customer's Service Contract was received by CARS and approved with payment on November 25, (See attached "Service Contract")The customer has Service Contract coverage on her vehicle through November 25, Since the inception of the customer's Service Contract only one (1) claim was called in by a repair facility on January 28, at 2:p.m., advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing two (2) front wheel bearings, rack & pinion, power steering pump, blower motor resister and engine issuesOn that same date at 2:p.m., a claims adjuster contacted the repair facilityDuring that telephone call the repair facility also stated that among the issues with the vehicle, the engine was running rough and there was an engine leakWe then explained our claim procedures in detail with the repair facility also advising that the vehicle would need to be torn down to the point of component failure to determine the exact cause of failure and extent of damageThe repair facility was to obtain the customer's approval for the teardownOn that same date at 4:p.m., we received a telephone call from the customer inquiring about the teardown proceduresDuring the telephone call the customer expressed her unhappiness with the teardown and also stated that she was aware the vehicle needed a new engineOn January 29, at 3:p.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising that the customer refused teardown of the engineWe then asked the repair facility to provide us with its cause of failure and estimate for repair of the other components in need of repairWe also requested that the repair facility state on their estimate that the customer was refusing teardown of the engine relating to the engine noise.After receiving the repair facility's cause of failure and estimate for repair (which also included replacement of the upper control arm assembly, which was not mentioned before), CARS contacted the repair facility on January 30, at 9:a.m., to review the estimateThe invoice also included the customer's refusal for the teardown of the engineWe then went over the amount we could authorize for the claim as follows: We could supply the two (2) front hub assemblies for $145.14, a rack and pinion for $and a power steering pump for $We would also allow $for fluidsMitchell’s OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer's Service Contract pays up to $per hourTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $CARS could supply the components as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer’s choiceWe then reviewed the upper control arm assembly, which were not mentioned previously by the repair facilityWe then asked the repair facility for the ball joints measurements and to call us back with their findingsOn that same date at 11:a.m., our claims manager received a telephone call from the customer who was very argumentative regarding the claimOur claims manager went over the customer's options as stated above, to either ship the parts or use the money allowanceThe customer wanted to know why we have to supply used partsOur claims manager explained that pursuant to the Terms and Conditions, CARS has the option to provide new or used partsIn the alternative, the customer could take our money allowance for the repairsOur claims manager also explained to the customer that since she refused to teardown the engine to determine the cause of failure, if there was any further damage to the engine due to continued operation, she would be solely responsible for the repairOn January 30, at 11:a.m., our claims adjuster returned a telephone call to the repair facilityThe repair facility explained that they were mistaken about the upper control arm assembly and now the vehicle only needed the lower ball jointWe requested the repair facility to send an updated estimateSee attached estimateOn January 30, at 2:p.m., after reviewing the new estimate, our claims adjuster contacted the repair facility and went over the new total amounts we could offer for the claim as follows: We could supply the two (2) front hub assemblies for $145.14, a rack and pinion for $179.84, power steering pump for $and lower ball joint for $We would also include an additional $for the rack and pinion and $for fluidsMitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take hours to complete and the customer's Service Contract pays up to $per hourTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $CARS could supply the components as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer’s choiceThe repair facility advised that the customer would take the allowance for the claim in the total amount of $An authorization number was then given to the repair facility for the claimOnce CARS receives the final invoice advising that the repairs are completed we will pay the repair facility the amount of $pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service ContractBy the customer's signature on her Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to its Terms and ConditionsThe customer's Service Contract states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 3(f): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: CARS has the right to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs." When CARS selected the above- mentioned replacement parts we used the cost of the parts to either be shipped to the repair facility and also to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously statedIt is the customer’s decision to either ship the replacement parts offered by CARS or take the allowance towards the repair of the vehicleAny supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working conditionNowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed componentHere, the repair facility advised CARS that the customer wanted to take the money allowance for the repair; therefore, the time frame issue mentioned in the customer's complaint to supply the parts are a nonissueWith regard to the customer’s engine issues, the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract state at Paragraph (c) "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: A proper diagnosis shall include tear-down to the point of component failure, performed by the repair facility, to determine the cause of failure and the extent of damageYou are responsible for all charges relating to the tear-down and diagnosis of the vehicle.” We include teardown to the point of component failure in our diagnostics in order for CARS to determine if the failed component was coveredThis increases the probability that the vehicle will be repaired properly the first timeTherefore, it is the customer's responsibility to pay for all diagnosis and teardown chargesSince the customer refused teardown or repair of the engine, should further damage occur due to continued operation, it would be the sole responsibility of the customer to repair as previously statedCARS relies on the information provided to us by the repair facilities and customers, since we cannot inspect every vehicle that has a service contract with usAs you can see from the claim information, the repair facility originally provided CARS with erroneous information regarding the upper control arm assembly, which they later informed us was lower ball joint failureCARS' service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers’ vehicles and do not provide "all-inclusive” coverageTherefore, pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairsThe service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper] coverageVarious provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the teardown, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductibleAccordingly, CARS has timely fulfilled all of its obligations under the Terms and Conditions the customer’s Service Contract regarding the customer's January 28, claimWhen a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me

I am in receipt of your letter dated March 23, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On June 3, 2013, the customer purchased the above- referenced vehicleOn that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (
Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on June 17, (the attached "Service Contract”)FIRST CLAIM: On August 14, at 10:a.ma repair facility advised CARS that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing front axle issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityDuring the processing of the claim we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility and the customer as follows: We could supply both the right and left front axles for $Mitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $325.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer’s choiceThe customer chose to take our cash allowance towards the repair of his choicePursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, on August 20, CARS paid the customer $via checkThe claim was then closedSECOND CLAIM: On November 19, at 11:a.ma repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing power steering pump and switch and hose issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityDuring the processing of the claim we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility and the customer as follows: We could supply the power steering pump for $and the press hose for $CARS’ could also pay $towards fluids for the repair of the customer's vehicleMitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $per hour for laborTherefore, total labor was $The claim was also subject to a $deductibleWe explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $677.09, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $towards fluid and $towards labor or pay $towards the repair of the customer's choiceThe customer chose to take our cash allowance towards the repair of his choicePursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract, on November 24, CARS paid the repair facility $via credit cardThe claim was then closedTHIRD CLAIM: On February 27, at 11:a.ma repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing engine issuesWe then went over our claim procedures with the repair facilityCARS advised the repair facility to obtain the customer's permission to tear down his vehicle to the point of component failureWe further advised that pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, the customer was responsible for all tear down and diagnostic costsOn March 5, at 10:a.mthe repair facility advised CARS that the timing chain had failed and threw the engine out of timeHe advised that he had found both valve and piston top damage and that the customer’s vehicle needed an engine replacementOn March 6, at 2:p.mafter reviewing the repair facility's estimate, CARS telephoned the repair facility and advised that if the timing chain is not broken we would need to know the cause of failure to the customer's vehicleOn that same day, March 6, 2015, at 3:p.m., in a recorded telephone call, the repair facility advised that the timing chain tensioner caused the failure to the customer’s vehicleOn March 6, at 4:p.mCARS advised the repair facility that under the customer’s Service Contract the timing chain tensioner is a non-covered component and any damage caused by the tensioner is not coveredOn March 18, at 11:a.mthe repair facility telephoned a CARS claims manager to advise that the customer had paid to have the engine torn down further and the timing chain tensioner was not the cause of failureThe repair facility advised that the #and #pistons caused the failure to the customer's engineThe claims manager advised the repair facility that the failure of the timing chain tensioner would cause piston damage to occurThe claims manager advised that he would review the engine claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle and contact the repair facility with our decisionOn March 18, at 2:p.m., after a management review of the engine claim, the claims manager advised the repair facility that CARS was standing by its original decision and unable to assist with the February 27, claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicleBy the customer's signature on his Value Plus Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions of his Service ContractIt is stated in the customer's Service Contract at Paragraph (q): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage/failure to a covered component caused by a failure of a non-covered component.” Here, regarding the February 27, engine claim, the failure to the engine (covered component) was caused by the failure of the timing chain tensioner (non-covered component)It is stated in the service contract: "Covered Components: "Coverage limited to above components.” And "under Term and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a): "components and Expenses Not Covered: components not listed regardless of failure.” The timing chain tensioner is not listed on the customer’s Service Contract as a covered componentCARS relies on the information provided to us by the repair facilities since we cannot inspect every vehicle that has a service contract with usWhen inconsistencies occur regarding cause of failure, CARS stands by the original cause of failure provided to us by the repair facilityThe repair facility advised CARS that the timing chain tensioner failed during a recorded telephone call on March 6, On March 18, the repair facility advised CARS that the pistons were the cause of failure; however, a failed timing chain tensioner could cause piston damageTherefore, based on the information provided by the repair facility, CARS stands by its original decision and is unable to assist with the February 27, engine claim pursuant to the customer's Service ContractCARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service ContractThe customer has Service Contract coverage on the above-referenced vehicle through June 17, CARS will review any claims opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle and if the failures are covered pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS will pay accordinglyWhen a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claimWe honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely, *** * ***

Check fields!

Write a review of C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by adding a photo

C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: AUTO WARRANTY PROCESSING SERVICE

Address: 4431 William Penn Hwy Ste 1, Murrysville, Pennsylvania, United States, 15668

Phone:

Show more...

Web:

www.carsprotectionplus.com


Add contact information for C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated