C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

I am in receipt of your letter dated January 22, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on September, 19, 2013 and on that same date she applied for a CARS Value Plus Service...

Contract (36 Months/Unlimited Miles). The customer’s Service Contract was received by CARS and approved with payment on September 26, 2013 (See attached "Service Contract"). Since the inception of the customer's Service Contract only one (1) claim was called in from a repair facility on January 19, 2015 at 3:02 p.m. advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing engine issues. We then went over claim procedures with the repair facility. After the repair facility provided us with its cause of failure and repair estimate (attached) on January 20, 2015, we went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply an engine for $875.00. Mitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 12.4 hours to complete and the customer’s Service Contract pays up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor was $744.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $1,519.00. CARS could supply the engine as stated above and pay $664.00 towards labor or pay $1,519.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back to us with the customer's decision. To date, we have not heard back from the repair facility regarding the customer's decision. The customer's complaint states that she is unhappy with the engine price, diagnosis and tear down, labor rate and time; however, by the customer's signature on her Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to its Terms and Conditions. The 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 engine we used the cost of the engine to either be shipped to the repair facility and to calculate the total amount of the claim as previously stated. It is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicle. Any supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working condition. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed component. Here, the engine CARS could supply has fewer miles than the engine currently in the customer’s vehicle. The Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract state at Paragraph 3 (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 damage. You 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 covered. This increases the probability that the vehicle will be repaired properly the first time. We were not requiring unnecessary teardown and diagnosis; we were only trying to determine the cause of failure. Therefore, it is the customer's responsibility to pay for all diagnosis and tear down charges. Also, the customer's service contract states at: "LABOR: The authorized time for a repair shall be based on the Mitchell OnDemand labor guide. The hourly labor rate will be the repair facility's rate up to $60.00 per hour. Should your repair facility's rate exceed this amount, you are responsible for the difference." Here, the repair facility's labor rate is $70.00 per hour and they are also charging a flat labor rate of $1,000.00 for the engine repair. Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract she is responsible for the difference in labor rate and time. CARS' service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers’ vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive” coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible. However, CARS is still willing to authorize the January 19, 2015 engine claim in the amount of $1,519.00, once we receive confirmation if the customer wants us to ship the engine or she wants to use the money allowance for the claim. When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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.

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.
When a component breaks, it's going to leak.  The reply is a loophole so they don't have to pay anything.  The valve cover broke & thus leaked, but they don't cover it because of a leak.  The oil pan was cracked & thus leaked, but hey, it has a leak & we don't cover that! AN OIL PAN HOLDS OIL SO IF IT BREAKS IT'S GOING TO LEAK!  This loophole gets them out of paying for ANYTHING because any item on a car that breaks is going to leak.  Just go over all the complaints here & see none were closed satisfactorily to the warranty-holder.
The seller of these warranties the used car dealers - how much do THEY get per policy sold??), oversell the worth of these things & the buyer thinks they're getting a solid warranty, but go though the logic of all their "exclusions" & you'll see they can deny paying for anything!
How they can get an A+ rating here  is beyond comprehension because, again, go though all the complaints here & none are resolved in the complainants  favor.  After having this issue I did search on the internet & having known all I've found out about this company, I wouldn't have wasted the money & time dealing with this company.  I would also like to see a "Claim Paid/Claim Denied" ratio...I bet it's really lopsided!
Whatever comes of this, so be it, but I am filing a Consumer Complaint with the Office of the Attorney General here in NJ and in Pennsylvania (which already sued them in 2004 - I guess they didn't learn!).
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that after reviewing the two propositions Cars Plus has propose, I am willing to accept the second option of taking the cash option  of $ 2,629.25 . I am also asking if Cars Plus would contact ** Automotive Repair in order for them to start working on my vehicle. 
Thank you,
[redacted]

I am in receipt of your letter dated November 7, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above- referenced vehicle on April 17, 2013. On that same date the customer also applied for a CARS Ultimate Plus...

Contract (48 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on May 17, 2013 (See attached Service Contract).
On March 26, 2014 at 9:27 a.m., a claim was called in by the repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing brake booster pump issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.
On March 26, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., we advised the repair facility that we were unable to assist with the brake booster pump claim pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer’s service contract. CARS advised the repair facility that the brake booster pump is not part of the master cylinder or the Anti-Lock Brake System.
On March 26, 2014 at 1:31 p.m., we advised the customer's friend that the brake booster pump is not listed as a covered component under her service contract. On March 27, 2014 at 4:53 p.m., we went over the service contract coverage with the customer and explained that listed components on the service contract are covered under the service contract. We again advised that the brake booster pump is not listed as a covered component on her service contract.
By the customer's signature on her Ultimate Plus Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions of her service contract. It is stated in the customer's service contract:        “COVERED COMPONENTS: COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVE
COMPONENTS." and under the terms and conditions at Paragraph 1 (a): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure." Here, the brake booster pump is not listed as a covered component on the front of the service contract; therefore, CARS is not able to assist with the repair or replacement of this part.
The brake booster pump and the master cylinder are two (2) separate components and can be repaired/replaced independently of each other. In addition, the brake booster pump is not part of the Anti-Lock Brake System and can be repaired/replaced independently of the Anti-Lock Brake System. The brake booster pump is not listed under the covered components on customer’s service contract.
Furthermore, under the customer’s service contract, CARS IS not required to cover the full cost of the repair. Said service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the service contract holder what is specifically covered under the service contract.
Accordingly, CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the terms and conditions of the customer’s service contract and therefore, we stand by our original decision and are unable to assist with the March 26, 2014 brake booster pump claim.
However, the customer does have service contract coverage on her vehicle through May 17, 2017. Should the customer incur future mechanical problems, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under her service contract. If the failed component is covered, CARS will authorize and pay the claim in accordance to the terms and conditions of the customer’s Ultimate Plus Service Contract.
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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 13, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and I would like to respond in the following manner: On November 13, 2013, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus...

Service Contract (48 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on November 13, 2013 (the attached "Service Contract”).
On October 10, 2014 at 2:53 p.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising us that the customer was experiencing driveshaft issues. The repair facility advised CARS that the U-Joint in the rear driveshaft had broken and damaged the yoke on the rear end. The repair facility further advised that the driveshaft was damaged from contact with the ground. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.
Later that same day, we went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the rear driveshaft for $225.00. Mitchell's OnDemand stated that the repair should take .7 hours to complete and the customer’s service contract pays up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor covered was $42.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $167.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above; however, we would not be able to assist with the cost of labor ($42.00), since the labor cost was less than the $100.00 deductible, or pay $167.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer’s decision.
On October 13, 2014 at 1:20 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer would like the cash allowance towards the repair of her vehicle. We then gave the repair facility an authorization number to begin repairs to the customer's vehicle.
On October 13, 2014, CARS customer service representatives reviewed the customer' service contract during three (3) separate telephone conversations. On that same day at 11:56 a.m., the customer advised CARS that she would like to cancel the service contract. We then went over refund policy and emailed a cancellation form to the customer. However, the email was returned as undeliverable, the customer's signature on the Value Plus Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that she read, understood, and agreed to the terms and conditions of her service contract. The
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 stated. It is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicle. Any supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working condition. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed component.
Pursuant to the customer's service contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various 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.
In her consumer complaint the customer is requesting a refund her service contract. The customer's service contract clearly states under terms and conditions at Paragraph 5 (a) and (d): CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: 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 stated." and “If the Service Contract is financed, you have the right to cancel the contract within the first 20 days by providing a written request to cancel for a full refund of the amount received by C.A.R.S. for the Service Contract, less any claims paid. The refund shall be paid to the lien holder. After 20 days, you have the right to cancel the Service Contract at any time by providing a written request to cancel. The lien holder will be refunded a prorated refund of the amount received by C.A.R.S. for the Service Contract, less a service fee (not to exceed $50.00), less any claims paid."
Please be advised that the customer is entitled to a prorated refund of the amount CARS' received from the selling dealer if the customer's vehicle currently has a lienholder and the customer is willing to sign a General Release before a notary as follows:
Amount received from dealer for service contract:                                   �...⇄ $ 899.00
Term of service contract - 48 months
Less twelve (12) months      proration $18.73 per month                             -   $   206.02
Less claim authorized                                   ...⇄ -   $   167.00
Less service fee                                      �...⇄ -   $   50.00
Total refund owed by CARS                                      ...⇄ $ 475.98
CARS service contracts are sold wholesale between selling dealers and CARS. Therefore, any issues with regard to any additional monies owed the customer are between the customer and the selling dealer.
Should the customer be agreeable to a refund, we will prepare a General Release for the service contract holders' execution. In addition, in order for CARS to send the refund to the lienholder, the customer must provide the name and address of the lienholder to CARS.
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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 January 26, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:     According to our records, the customer purchased the above- referenced vehicle on January 16, 2015 and on that same date he applied for a...

CARS Value Limited Service Contract (3 Months/4,500 Miles]. The customer’s Service Contract was received by CARS and approved with payment on January 20, 2015 (See attached "Service Contract"]. On January 23, 2015 at 11:44 a.m., the customer advised a CARS customer service representative that his vehicle was shaking either on January 21, 2015 or January 22, 2015. He further stated that he took his vehicle to a repair facility and was advised that he needed brakes and ball joints replaced. The CARS customer service representative went over the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract with him. On January 23, 2015 at 1:21 p.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing ball joint, brake, parking brake cable, alignment and rear wheel cylinder issues. We then went over our claim procedures in detail with the repair facility. On January 23, 2015 at 1:39 p.m., the customer advised CARS in a recorded telephone call that his vehicle needed tires at the time of vehicle purchase. He further advised that the dealer lowered the sales price of his vehicle so that he could purchase tires. Later that same day the repair facility advised CARS that the customer’s vehicle had a grinding sound in the rear of the vehicle and popping sounds in the front of the vehicle. The repair facility further advised that the issues with the ball joints were a result of age. CARS advised that we were unable to assist with the ball joint repairs because the failures were prior to the customer's Service Contract acceptance. The brake shoes, alignment, tires, and parking brake cable were non-covered components pursuant to the customer's Service Contract. We then went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility. We could supply the rear wheel cylinders for $ 20.00. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 1.8 hours to complete, and the customer’s service contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore,   total labor was $108.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $28.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $8.00 towards labor or pay $28.00 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. The repair facility was to get back to us with the customer’s decision. On January 26, 2014 at 9:29 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that they thought the customer took the vehicle to the selling dealer. The claim was then closed. Please be advised that by the customer's signature on the service contract application, the customer acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to its terms and conditions. The customer's Service Contract states under the Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(b):                                     �...⇄ "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Component failures occurring before C.A.R.S. Protection Plus, Inc. ("CARS.”) approves this Service Contract application are NOT covered. C.A.R.S. does NOT warrant the condition of the vehicle at the time of purchase.” CARS relies on the information that is received from the customer and the repair facility to determine if a repair is covered pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the Service Contract. Here, pursuant to the above-referenced telephone conversations, it was determined that issues with the ball joints were present prior to Service Contract acceptance. 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 brake shoes, alignment, tires, and parking brake cable are not listed as being covered on the Service Contract; therefore, they are the responsibility of the customer to repair. CARS' service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers’ vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive” coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible. After management review of the invoice supplied by the repair facility, in a goodwill gesture, CARS is willing to assist with the claim as follows: We are willing to assist with ball joints in the amount of $135.48 and the wheel parts/cylinders in the amount of $128.00. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 4.7 hours to complete, and the customer's service contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor CARS can assist with is $282.00. CARS is willing to also waive the $100.00 deductible applied to all claims. The total amount CARS is willing to assist with the claim is $545.48. The 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 allowances for 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 stated. I have taken the liberty of enclosing a General Release for the customer's witnessed and notarized signature if the customer is agreeable to CARS assistance with the January 23, 2015 mechanical claim in the amount of $545.48. Upon our receipt the notarized General Release, we will send a check directly to the customer in the amount of $545.48. The customer has Service Contract coverage on his vehicle through April 20, 2015 or until the odometer register 191,971, whichever occurs first. Should his vehicle incur future mechanical problems, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under the Service Contract. If the failed component is covered, CARS will authorize and pay the claim in accordance to the terms and conditions of the Service Contract. When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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.

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.
Regards,
[redacted]

RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2004 CADILLAC CTS VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: C-[redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated December 28, 2015 enclosing the customer's consumer complaint.Upon receiving the customer's consumer complaint, CARS attempted to reach the customer directly...

and yesterday, January 14, 2016, the customer returned our telephone call. The customer was agreeable to CARS offer of resolution to her consumer complaint.CARS now considers this matter resolved.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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,Jason P. [redacted]General Counsel

Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated August 16, 2017, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on August 8, 2017. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS...

Power Train Service Contract (3 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on August 9, 2017. (See attached “Service Contract")First Claim: On August 15, 2017 at 2:18 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues. CARS then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On August 15, 2017 at 2:37 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer had removed his vehicle from the repair facility without any repairs being performed on his vehicle. CARS advised that pursuant to his Service Contract, the customer's vehicle must be at the repair facility for a claim to be opened. CARS then advised the repair facility that a new claim must be opened when the customer returned his vehicle to the repair facility. The claim was then closed.Second Claim: On August 15, 2017 at 3:24 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing axle seal and rear driveshaft u-joint issues. CARS then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On August 15, 2017 at 3:46 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the vehicle was shaking when driven. The repair facility advised that they had found loose u-joints, left front axle was clicking and loose and all the seals were leaking. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures again.Pursuant to the customer's Service Contract coverage, CARS then went over the amount we could assist with the repair of his vehicle as follows: We could supply the left front axle seal for $6.12, two (2) universal joints for ($20.00 each) $40.00 and the front axle for $58.23. The repair facility requested labor assistance of .8 hours of labor for the axle repair, .3 hours of labor for the axle seal, and 1.0 hours of labor for the universal joint for a total of 2.1 hours of labor time. CARS was able to authorize the total amount of labor time requested by the repair facility in the amount of 2.1 hours, and the customer's Service Contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor we could assist with was $126.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained to the repair facility that the total value of the authorized claim after the deductible was applied was $130.35. CARS further explained that the customer had two (2) choices for assistance with the approved claim: CARS could either supply the parts as stated above or the customer could take a cash allowance totaling $130.35 to be used towards the specifically-authorized repair. If the customer chose for CARS to ship our supplied part, CARS would be able to assist with the cost of labor in the amount of $26.00 after the deductible was applied. The repair facility advised that they would contact the customer regarding the customer's decision for assistance with the repair of his vehicle.On August 15, 2017 at 4:26 p.m., the customer advised our refund department that he was unhappy with his Service Contract coverage and wanted to cancel his coverage. CARS advised the customer that we could email a cancellation form for his signature and he would be eligible for a full refund if he cancelled in the first twenty (20) days of his coverage. CAR then emailed the cancellation form to the customer. On that same day, the customer returned an executed cancellation form to CARS.On August 15, 2017 at 4:26 p.m., the customer telephoned CARS to review the options for CARS' assistance with his claim. CARS advised the customer that the labor times we quoted to the repair facility for assistance with were the labor times requested by the repair facility when we reviewed the options for CARS' assistance. CARS advised the customer that his Service Contract paid up to $60.00 per hour for labor charges and any amount over that time was he responsibility. CARS further advised that the price of the covered components were based upon the cost of aftermarket parts. The customer advised that he would call CARS with the repair facility to discuss the options for repair.On August 17, 2017, CARS processed the customer's cancellation of his Service Contract. Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS then mailed a check to the selling dealer for our portion of the refund due to the customer.By his signature, the customer acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. It is stated on the front of the customer's Service Contract: "COVERED COMPONENTS SEALS AND GASKETS Seals and Gaskets are covered only when required in conjunction with the replacement of a covered component." Here, only the left front seal is covered under the customer's Service Contract because it was being replaced in conjunction with the left axle. The rear axle seal and the transmission seal are not covered under the customer's Service Contract since they were not being replaced in conjunction with a covered component. Here, any costs associated with the rear axle and the rear transmission seal would be the customer's responsibility.The customer's Service Contract states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 2 (k): "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 $100.00 deductible per claim." The customer is responsible for a $100.00 deductible for each claim authorized by CARS for the repair of his vehicle. Here, the total value of the August 15, 2017 mechanical claim opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle was $130.35 after the $100.00 deductible was applied.The customer's Service Contract states: “COVERED COMPONENTS LABOR: The authorized time for a covered repair will be based on the ProDemand labor guide. The hourly labor rate will be the repair facility's rate up to $60.00 per hour. Should your repair facility's rate exceed this amount, You are responsible for the difference.” Here, during the processing of the August 15, 2017 mechanical claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle, the repair facility advised CARS that the labor rate for the repair of the customer's vehicle was $80.00 per hour. CARS authorized the repair facility's requested labor times for a total of 2.1 hours; therefore, the total value of the labor portion of mechanical claim is $126.00. Here, the customer would be responsible for any amount over $60.00 per hour for the labor costs and any labor time over 2.1 hours associated with the repair of his vehicle.CARS service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers' vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive" coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various 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.The customer cancelled his Power Train Service Contract on August 15, 2017; therefore, his vehicle no longer has Service Contract coverage. CARS issued a check to the selling dealer on August 17, 2017 for our portion of the customer's refund of his Service Contract.Ms. [redacted], I hope the above paragraphs explain the reasoning behind the options CARS offered the customer to assist with the repair of his vehicle.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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 my office.Sincerely,Jason *. M[redacted]General Counsel

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.
I feel as though Cars Protection Inc's is misleading and doesn't account for unusual circumstances.  I purchased the plan for a peace of mind when puchasing a used vehicle.  I would not recommend anyone purchase their plans.  I purchased one of their value plus plans.  When my engine in my car went out 3 months after I purchased the plan, the wanted me to pay fee to have my engine torn down.  This is written in the contract that I signed but I do not feel as though it is fair for me to pay over $1500 to have my engine taken apart without them being able to guarantee me that they would cover the cost of the repair once the cause of engine failure  was determine.  They want me to pay to have my engine taken apart without being able to promise that they would cover the repair even after two place told me that I needed a new engine.  The customer service reps and supervisors were rude and all they kept saying was you signed the contract. No customer service skills and we're unwilling to refund any of my plan.  I would recommend keeping the money you pay for this extended warranty and doing paying for your own repairs.
Regards,
[redacted]

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 "used" [redacted] part provided by CARS arrived at the shop before the weekend on the first week of March.  In addition, the [redacted] shop had to wait for a part that they ordered because aftermarket parts or used parts do not come with all the components required unlike the parts that are available/provided by the shop so it delayed the work process. On top of that, there are other vehicles lined up for maintenance which delayed my vehicle completion for a day or two.  I got the vehicle on March 12, almost three weeks after I brought it to the shop for diagnosis and maintenance on Feb 23. On March 13, there was CEL and at the same time the steering was stiff (almost as bad as the humvees that I drove for almost a year in the streets of Iraq).  This was due to the bad "used" rack and pinion that was provided by CARS.  This goes back to my original concern about quality control for these "used parts" normally provided by CARS.  The one year parts warranty provided by CARS do not solve the issues of discomfort to customers from dealing with unreliable "used" parts installed in our vehicles. I am filing a separate Revdex.com complaint for this issue.                                     
Regards,
[redacted]

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.SINCE THIS COMPLAINT WAS FILED THE SELLING DEALER SPOKE WITH C.A.R.S. AND EXPLAINED THAT THIS WAS A NORMAL CONDITION FOR THIS CAR WHICH THEY REFUSED TO BELIEVE, SO THEY (CARS ) WAS REFERRED TO AN ELECTRICAL SHOP TO WHICH THEY SPOKE  AND TOLD THE SELLING DEALER TO RETURN THE PAPER WORK TO THEM. WHICH YOU BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO ACCEPT THE CONTRACT.WELL SUPRISE THEY SENT A LETTER BACK (INCLOSED) STATING NOW IT WAS PAST THE 30 DAYS SINCE THE CAR WAS PURCHASED SO THEY WERE NOT GOING TO HONOR THE CONTRACT UNLESS THE CAR WAS INSPECTED,WHICH I HAVE NO PROPLEM WITH AS LONG AS THEY PAY THE BILL.I AM NOT GOING TO SPEND MY MONEY TO HAVE A CAR INSPECTED THAT IS IN PERFECT WORKING ORDER. THEY SHOULD HAVE PEOPLE ON THERE STAFF WHO HAVE A WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF AUTOMOBILES,AFTER ALL THEY ARE A AUTOMOTIVE WARRANTY COMPANY. SHOULD THIS HAVE BEEN THE CASE THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THIS CAR HAS AN ALTERNATOR WITH THE ELECTRIC POWER MANAGEMENT. ( PAGE 3-37 OF THE 2008 OWNERS MANUAL) DO YOU NEED A COPY OF THAT TO PROVE MY POINT THAT THE CAR DOES NOT NEED AN INSPECTION.THIS IS JUST ANOTHER TACTIC THEY USE IN HOPING THAT THE CUSTOMER WILL GO AWAY INSTEAD OF HELPING THE CUSTOMER.

January 9, 2017VIA: SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2002 DODGE 1500 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated January 3, 2017 enclosing the...

above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On February 29, 2016 the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract [12 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on March 2, 2016 [the attached “Service Contract"). On March 31, 2016, the customer extended his Service Contract coverage for twelve [12) months.On November 29, 2016 at 2:02 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing rear differential, driveshaft and gas tank issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On November 29, 2016 at 3:02 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS in a recorded telephone that the customer's vehicle has no alterations/modifications. The repair facility further advised that that the rear differential locked causing the driveshaft to break up resulting in a hole in the muffler, dent in the gas tank and the yoke damaged the rear differential. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On December 27, 2016 at 1:14 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the pinion on the customer's vehicle froze causing the rear differential to lock and break the driveshaft housing. CARS advised the repair facility to hold all parts and again reviewed our claim procedures.CARS determined that an independent inspection of the customer's vehicle was necessary to verily the exact cause and extent of damage to the vehicle.The independent inspection occurred the on December 29, 2016. The independent inspector found the customer's vehicle to have oversize tires. After management review of the independent inspection, CARS determined that the customer’s Service Contract was now cancelledand CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the customer's vehicle due to the alterations/modification to the customer's vehicle pursuant to the Term and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.On December 30, 2016 at 10:25 a.m., CARS advised the repair facility that the customer's Service Contract was cancelled and CARS would issue a prorated refund for the Service Contract. CARS further advised that CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the customer's vehicle pursuant to the customer's Service Contract. The claim was then closed by CARS.On December 30, 2016 at 11:06 a.m., CARS advised the customer of the cancellation of his Service Contract. We advised the customer that pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract, CARS' service contract does not cover altered/modified vehicles.By the customer's signature on the customer's Value Plus Service Contract the customer acknowledged that the customer read, understood and agreed to the terms and conditions contained therein. It is stated under the Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(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."The customer's service contract also states at Paragraph 2(e) and 2(g): “PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: "Altered or modified vehicles are not covered and shall also void the service contract."As previously stated on November 29, 2016 at 3:02 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS in a recorded telephone that the customer's vehicle had no alterations/modifications.However, the independent inspector found the tires on the customer's vehicle to be modified; therefore, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract CARS cancelled the customer's Service Contract for modifications/alterations of the tire size. The alterations/modifications of the customer's vehicle are not according to the manufacturer's specifications. The alterations/modifications can affect the way the vehicle performs and also can cause undue mechanical problems with the vehicle. Here, if the repair facility had advised CARS of the oversize tires on the customer's vehicle, CARS would have cancelled the customer's Service Contract immediately and not moved forward with the rear differential, driveshaft and gas tank claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicle.It is also stated in our cancellation policies for altered/modified vehicles are clearly stated at Paragraph 5 (c): “CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: If 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." CARS has attached a Service Contract Cancellation form for the customer to return to us via regular mail, fax or email with the required information for a prorated refund. This Service Contract Cancellation form was also mailed to the customer on December 30, 2016. CARS 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 us. As stated above, CARS became aware of the alterations/modification to the customer's vehicle when an independent inspection was performed on the customer's vehicle. Once notified of a modified/altered vehicle, CARS has the right to cancel the service contract immediately. The customer's Service Contract is now void and he does not have Service Contract coverage under any of CARS' service contracts.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%. If the customer has any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmmAttachments

January 27, 2017VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITERE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 FORD EXPLORER VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated January 26, 2017, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On December 9, 2016, the...

customerpurchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (24 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on December 12, 2016 (the attached “Service Contract").After a management review of the customer's consumer complaint, CARS determined that the customer was entitled to full refund of the amount CARS received for his Service Contract.By the customer's signature on his Service Contract he stated that he read understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. It states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 5 (a through d): CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: "You have the right to cancel Your Service Contract up to 20 days from the effective date as stated on Your Cars I.D. card by providing a written request to cancel for a full refund, paid to Your dealer or lienholder, of the amount received bv CARS, less any claims paid.Please note that CARS service contracts are sold wholesale to selling dealers. Therefore, what the customer paid for his Service Contract is not what CARS received for the cost of his Service Contract. The amount received by CARS will be reflected in the copy of the check sent to customer's lienholder. CARS will advise the selling dealer that the customer is eligible for a refund and the selling dealer is responsible for providing the remaining amount to the customer's lienholder.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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 my office.Sincerely, Jason [redacted] General Counsel

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.
As stated in the initial complaint, C.A.R.S. does NOT have the right to supply salvaged parts. C.A.R.S. paid $2,160 for the salvaged engine. See attached invoice. If you add $2,160 the amount they paid for the engine along with 12.1 hours of labor $726 and $75 for fluids, it totals $2,961. Which is more than what C.A.R.S. is offering to pay for the repairs ($2,636). The offer does NOT equal their actual documented costs. C.A.R.S. response repetitively copied the terms and conditions of the contract instead of addressing the actual complaint details. As previously stated in initial complaint the definition of salvage is different from the definition of used.
Regards,
[redacted]

June 9, 2016 VIA: Submitted to Revdex.com website [redacted] Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania [redacted] RE:      COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2006 PONTIAC GTO VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am in receipt of your letter...

dated June 7, 2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on March 12, 2016. On that same date the customer also applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (3 Months/4,500 Miles] and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on March 16, 2016. The customer’s Service Contract will expire on June 16, 2016. On June 3, 2016 at 10:40 a.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing prop shaft issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility. On June 3, 2016 at 1:45 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the driveshaft for $450.00. ProDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 1.4 hours to complete and the customer’s service contract pays up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor covered was $84.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the claim after the deductible was applied was $434.00, and we could supply the part as stated above and pay $84.00 towards labor or pay $434.00 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer's decision. By the customer’s signature on his Power Train Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. The 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 part 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 stated. It is the customer's decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicle. Any supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working condition. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed component. It is stated at Paragraph 2(C]: PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: The Service Contract does NOT go into effect until: (1) this application is.received by CARS Protection Plus, Inc. (“CARS”), (2) with proper payment, and (3) approved by CARS, which may be different than my date of vehicle purchase. This Service Contract will last for the time period or mileage indicated whichever occurs first, so long as You own the vehicle.” The customer’s Service Contract expires on June 16, 2016; therefore, the supplied driveshaft will not have coverage beyond June 16, 2016. The customer's Service Contract is to be utilized to assist with the repair of her vehicle and does not provide "all inclusive" coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The Service Contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the Service Contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, non-covered components, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible. Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to offer any further assistance with the repair of the customer’s vehicle. However, in a goodwill gesture, CARS has advised the customer that we are willing to provide a new driveshaft for the repair of his vehicle and all other expenses associated with the repair of his vehicle would be the customer's responsibility. The customer advised CARS that he is agreeable to this. CARS now considers this Revdex.com complaint as resolved.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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 my office.Sincerely,Jason P. M[redacted]General Counsel  JPM/jmm Attachment

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

I am in receipt of your letter dated October 16, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on October 1, 2014. On that same date he also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract...

(3 Months/Unlimited Miles).
On October 6, 2014 at 9:33 a.m., the customer telephoned CARS and advised that he purchased his vehicle on October 1, 2014 and was checking on his coverage. A customer service representative explained that his service contract application had not yet been received by CARS. Our customer service representative reviewed the terms and conditions of the service contract with him. Later that same day on October 6, 2014, the customer's service contract was received by CARS and approved with payment (See attached Service Contract).
On October 15, 2014 at 8:59 a.m., a customer service representative telephoned the customer in response to an email submission requesting information. The customer service representative reviewed the terms and conditions of the service contract with him.
On October 16, 2014 at 9:30 a.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing heater core, ball joint, axle, axle seal, and valve cover gasket issues. We then went over claim procedures with the repair facility.
On October 16, 2014 at 9:59 a.m., the customer advised us in a recorded telephone conversation that his vehicle began to experience heater core issues just one (1) day after vehicle purchase (i.e. October 2. 2014).
Later that same day we advised the repair facility that pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract we would not be able to assist with the oil leak, tie rod end or any other fluid leaks. In addition, we would not be able to assist with the heater core repair, because this failure occurred prior to service contract acceptance as stated above. We then went over the components and amounts we could authorize for the customer's vehicle with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the left upper and left front lower ball joints for $11.15 and two (2) front axles for $77.58. Mitchell's OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 4.4 hours to complete and the customer's service contract paid up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore; total labor was $264.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the claim for the covered components after the deductible was applied was $252.73, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $164.00 towards labor or pay $252.73 towards the repair of the customer's choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back to us with the customer's decision. The repair facility advised us that the customer would take the cash allowance. An authorization number was given to the repair facility to begin repairs on the customer's vehicle.
By the customer’s signature on his service contract application, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to its terms and conditions. Directly below the customer's signature, it states:  "The service contract goes into effect when this application is received with
payment and approved by C.A.R.S. Protection Plus, Inc." In addition, at Paragraph 1(b): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED:                                    ...⇄ Component failures that occur before
C.A.R.S. Protection Plus, Inc. ("C.A.R.S.") approves this Service Contract application are not covered. C.A.R.S. does not warrant the condition of the vehicle at the time of purchase.” CARS relies on the information that is received from the customer and the repair facility to determine if a repair is covered pursuant to the terms and conditions of the service contract. Here, based upon the customer's information, it was determined that the heater core failure was present on October 2, 2014, which was prior to the customer's service contract acceptance with payment by CARS on October 6, 2014; therefore, no assistance for the heater core repair could be offered.
The 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 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 stated. It is the customer’s decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicle. Any supplied parts we provide are tested and known to be in good working condition. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new part when replacing a failed component.
The service contract states under COVERED COMPONENTS: "SEALS, GASKETS & FLUIDS Seals, gaskets and fluids are covered only when required in conjunction with the replacement of a covered component." In addition, the service contract states under terms and conditions at Paragraph l(r): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Fluid leaks and damage caused bv fluid leaks.” Pursuant to the customer's service contract the leaks and gaskets repairs needed for the repair of his vehicle are not covered.
Pursuant to the customer's service contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various 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.
In summary, during the October 16, 2014 recorded telephone call, the customer stated that he began to experience heater core issues on October 2. 2014. just one (1) day after he took his vehicle home from the selling dealership. CARS did not receive and approve the customer's service contract until October 6, 2014: therefore, we are unable to assist with this portion of the mechanical claim. Furthermore, CARS would not be able to assist with any repair regarding the oil leaks. However, as stated above, CARS did authorize the amount of $252.73 towards the covered component repairs (i.e. upper ball joints and front axles) of the customer's vehicle.
When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We 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.

They have replaced the failed parts with used ones. I understand that this is allowed by the contract however the first differential that they sent was defective. It was replaced by another used part that appears to be ok but still worn as it has play in it and "clunks" when placed in gear.      They also replaced the brake booster pump, which had also failed, with a used part. My mechanic was tasked with finding and installing that part. It worked for one day and has failed again - leaking brake fluid onto my garage floor and causing the brakes to "bleed off" when sitting with the brake pedal applied. I contacted my mechanic and have to take the vehicle back in for repair/replacement of the failed "used" part.      My vehicle has 76,000 miles on it. The used parts, that are being installed, are worn out. I understand that it would be difficult to locate used parts with 76,000 miles or less on them! With that being said, if a used part cannot be located, with verified mileage less or equal to mine, then a new or remanufactured part should be used especially when that part controls the brake system!      As long as worn out/used parts are provided, my vehicle is going to be in/out of the repair facility as this warranty still has 2+ years on it and unlimited mileage left. With the exception of the front differential (which is clunking when placed in gear), my truck is in no better shape then when it was taken to be repaired. In fact, my vehicle did not leak ANY fluids prior to these used parts being installed.

November 11, 2016VIA: SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: Complaint No. 11837852008 BMW 7501 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.[redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated November 8, 2016, enclosing the...

above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On June, 2015, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Ultimate Value Service Contract (48 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on July 23, 2015 (see attached Service Contract).Three (3) claims have been opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle since the inception of the Service Contract.First Claim: On January 7, 2016, at 11:03 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing timing cover gasket, vacuum pump, oil press switch oil leak issues. The repair facility further advised that there were also issues with the catalytic converter. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On January 7, 2016, at 2:29 p.m., CARS advised that oil leaks and catalytic converters were not covered under the customer's Service Contract and the customer was responsible for all repairs to the vehicle. The claim was then closed.Second Claim: On August 31, 2016 at 2:49 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing trunk ram motor and catalytic converter issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On August 31, 2016 at 4:06 p.m., in a voice message, CARS advised that the truck ram motor and catalytic converter were non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract; therefore, CARS could not offer any assistance with the claim.On August 31, 2016 at 2:56 p.m., the repair facility telephoned CARS to advise that the check engine light was displayed with codes for the catalytic converters and the trunk needed a hydro unit. The repair facility advised that the trunk lock actuator had not failed. CARS then advised that the truck ram motor and catalytic converter were non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract; therefore, CARS could not offer any assistance with the claim. The claim was then closed.Prior to the third claim referenced below, on September 19, 2016 11:11 a.m., the customer's daughter, who is not the Service Contract holder, advised CARS that she wanted to cancel the customer's Service Contract. CARS then reviewed Texas provisions for cancellation with her. CARS advised the customer's daughter that any refund would be a prorated refund since twenty days had passed from the purchase date. The customer's daughter advised that CARS was using “loopholes” to get out of paying claims and she should be given a full refund on behalf of her father's Service Contract. CARS explained that pursuant to the customer's Service Contract and Texas provisions for cancellation, the customer was entitled to a prorated refund of the amount the customer paid for the Service Contract. The customer's daughter then asked to speak to a manager.On September 21, 2016 and September 23, 2016 CARS office manager attempted to return telephone calls to the customer; however, the customer was not able to take our telephone calls.Third Claim: On October 27, 2016 at 10:30 a.m., a repair facility advised CARS that thecustomer's vehicle was experiencing thrust rod bushing issues. CARS advised that thrust rod bushings were non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract; therefore, CARS could not offer any assistance with the claim. The claim was then closed.On November 7, 2016 at 9:30 a.m., either the customer or the customer's daughter advised CARS she wanted to cancel the Service Contract. CARS then advised that we would send a Service Contract Cancellation Form to the customer. The customer/customer's daughter advised that she wanted immediate managerial assistance with the cancellation of her Service Contract The customer advised that our office manager did not cancel the Service Contract when she requested the cancellation because the customer's daughter is not the contract holder. The customer/customer's daughter advised CARS that we should have called her back. As stated above, CARS attempted to call the customer's daughter back in late September.On November 7, 2016 at 9:57 a.m., CARS advised the customer's daughter that the prorated refund would be sent by CARS to the selling dealer and he would issue the refund monies to the customer.On November 7, 2016 at 10:24 a.m., CARS' office manager called the customer. The customer/customer's daughter advised the office manager that she no longer needed her assistance since she already received the cancellation form from CARS and she had no further questions.By the customer's signature on the Ultimate Value Service Contract the customer acknowledged that the customer read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of the Service Contract. It is stated in the Service Contract: "COVERED COMPONENTS: COVERAGE LIMITEDTO ABOVE COMPONENTS." Also, as stated under the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract at Paragraph 1 (a): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure. Here the catalytic converter, thrust rod bushing and the truck ram motor are not listed as covered components under the customer's Service Contract. Therefore, it is the customer's responsibility to pay for these repairs.CARS service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers' vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive" coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various 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.In the consumer complaint the customer states that the customer would like a refund of the Service Contract. It is stated in the Service Contract under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 5 (a) and (b): “CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: You have the right to cancel the Service Contract up to 20 days from the effective date as stated on Your CARS I.D. card by providing a written request to cancel for a full refund, paid to Your dealer or lienholder, of the amount received by CARS, less any claims paid. The Service Contract will not be reinstated after a cancellation is requested." and "After 20 days, there is no credit for early termination except in the case of a total loss, as determined by the insurance carrier, or repossession by the lienholder as stated." Here, CARS received the written cancellation request from the customer on November 10, 2016. Since the customer's Service Contract was approved on July 23, 2015, the cancellation request was past the first twenty (20) days.The Service Contract also states: ADDITIONAL STATE DISCLOSURES: THIS IS NOT ANINSURANCE POLICY TEXAS: If a Service contract holder cancels a Service Contract on or after the 31st day of purchase CARS: (a) Shall refund to the Service Contract holder the prorated purchase price of the contract reflecting the remaining term of the contract, based on mileage, time, or another reasonably applicable measure of the remaining term that must be disclosed in the contract, decreased by the amount of any claims paid under the Service Contract, (b) May impose a reasonable cancellation fee not to exceed $50.00..." Here, since CARS has received the customer's request to cancel the service contract in writing, the customer is entitled to a prorated refund under Texas Statutes. The proration of the customer's refund should be calculated on the date CARS received the written request (i.e. November 10, 2016); however, in a goodwill gesture, CARS is processing a prorated refund back-dating to September 19, 2016, which is the original date the customer verbally requested cancellation of the Service Contract. The prorated refund of CARS' portion of the refund will be mailed to the selling dealer. Both CARS' portion of the refund and the selling dealer's portion of the refund will be provided to the customer by the selling dealer.Please note that CARS service contracts are sold wholesale to selling dealers. The selling dealer had a right to mark up the cost of the Service Contract for a profit. Therefore, what the customer paid for the Service Contract is not what CARS received for the cost of the Service Contract.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%. If you have any further question, please contact my office.Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmmAttachment