C.A.R.S Protection Plus Inc

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]

July 3,2017VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID# [redacted]VIN (Last 8): [redacted]OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated June 22, 2017, enclosing the above-referenced consumer...

complaint.Please be advised that CARS has resolved all the issues regarding this complaint with the customer.Therefore, at this time, CARS is requesting that you mark this complaint as resolved. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact my office.Sincerely,Jason *. M[redacted]General Counsel

COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2008 VW BEETLE VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am in receipt of your letter dated August 24, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: After a management review of the customer’s consumer complaint, CARS has...

provided the customer with the name of a dealer near her residence who will provide an inspection to her vehicle at no cost to her. After the inspection of the customer's vehicle, the selling dealer will submit an Independent Service Contract (Recurring Payment) application and payment authorization form with one (1) month payment provided by the customer to CARS. CARS considers this matter to be 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 [redacted]  General Counsel

RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]
2009 FORD EXPEDITION VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated September 9, 2015, enclosing the above referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: CARS contacted the customer on September 15, 2015 to request...

that he provide an invoice from the repair facility.On September 16, 2015, after the customer provided the invoice for the repair of his vehicle to CARS and after a management review of the customer's consumer complaint, CARS advised the customer that CARS would pay $190.88 towards the repair of his vehicle. The customer has agreed to this amount. Enclosed please find a copy of check no. [redacted] in the amount of $190.88 made payable to the customer.CARS considers this matter to be 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 [redacted] General Counsel

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  I would truly like to understand what the procedure is if when work needs to be done on a holiday, evening or weekend when you are not open.  Are we supposed to wait until you do answer phones?  Even though the claimants happen to be working people who might not be able to get the work done until the next weekend?  What if that causes an accident or worse??  That is something your company should definitely  look into.
Regards,
[redacted]

August 21, 2017VIA: SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2007 MAZDA CX-7 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated August 14, 2017, enclosing...

the above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On May 20, 2017, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (3 Months/4,500 Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on June 15, 2017 (the attached "Service Contract"]. The customer has vehicle coverage on her vehicle until September 15, 2017 or 148,720 miles, whichever occurs first.On July 28, 2017 at 10:50 a.m., a mechanical claim was opened by a repair facility on behalf of the customer's vehicle.On July 28, 2017 at 11:20 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer’s complaint was that the vehicle was leaking oil, a there was a suspension noise when driving and the check engine light "CEL" was displayed. The repair facility found that there were severe oil leaks from the pcv hose, turbo, rear axle seals and the oil cooler; however, the oil level in the oil cooler was full and the condition was good. There were severe leaks from the a/c condenser and the radiator at the tank seam. The coolant level was low in the expansion tank, but the condition was good. The repair facility stated that there were no other coolant leaks. The rear differential fluid was in range and the condition was fair. There were no other rear differential leaks. The right c/v boot was torn. The repair facility found the right outer tie rod end was loose and was the cause of the suspension noise. The thermostat range was stuck open and not warming in a specified time. The EGR was stuck partially open and the purge valve was stuck closed. There were codes with the camshaft. The repair facility found that when the vehicle starts it rattles like a loose chain, but the noise goes away after about 30 seconds. The repair facility stated that in the past all the vehicles they have taken apart had chains that were stretched. CARS then advised the repair facility that we would have all the information reviewed and would call back with how to proceed with the claim.On July 28, 2017 at 11:20 a.m., the repair facility confirmed with CARS that the mechanical issues with the customer's vehicle were the result of the failure/stretching of the timing chain and not a result of the oil leaks and the pressure loss caused by the oil leaks.On July 28, 2017 at 11:58 a.m., after the claim was reviewed by management, CARS advised the repair facility that all the non-covered components (i.e. thermostat, radiator, rear axle seals, turbo, tie rod, purge valve, a/c condenser, oiler cooler, c/v boot, EGR valve and pcv hose) would need to be repaired and replaced on the customer's vehicle and the “CEL" cleared. The vehicle would then need to be retested prior to CARS being able to determine if CARS could move forward with possible assistance for any remaining timing chain issues.On July 31, 2017 at 10:51 a.m., after obtaining permission from the customer to discuss the claim with her husband, CARS went over the claim with him. The customer's husband inquired as to why CARS was requiring repair of the vehicle prior to determining if we could offer assistance. During that telephone call, CARS advised the customer's husband that only the timing chain would be available for possible coverage and all other items in need of repair are non-covered components. We also advised the customer's husband that the oil leaks would need to be corrected, the “CEL" cleared and the vehicle retested to determine if a timing chain issue was present. CARS also advised the customer's husband that the repair facility advised CARS that the noise goes away after 30 second, which is not common with a stretch timing chain issue. The customer's husband was not happy with the claim status and was transferred to CARS Claims Director for further assistance.On July 31, 2017 at 11:11 a.m., CARS' Claims Director attempted to explain several times to the customer's husband that the oils leaks would need to be addressed first so that any failures to the timing chain would be determined. The customer's husband then inquired about a cancellation and any refund amount. CARS' Claims Director advised that the customer would need to contact our cancellation department. Once the customer was on the line, the call was transferred to the cancellation department.On August 1, 2017 at 1:06 p.m., CARS returned a telephone call to the repair facility and again explained that CARS could not move forward with any possible assistance with the timing chain portion of the claim until all the oil leaks and non-coverage components were repaired and the “CEL" cleared and the vehicle was retested.By the customer's signature on her Power Train Service Contract under the Acceptance to Terms, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Covered Components and Terms and Conditions contained therein. The customer's Service Contract states at: “COVERED COMPONENTS: COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVE COMPONENTS." Also, at Paragraphs 1 (a) & (q): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: COMPONENTS NOT LISTED REGARDLESS OF FAILURE. COVERAGELIMITED TO THIS SPECIFIC VERSION OF THE CONTRACT, REGARDLESS OF OTHERREVISIONS." And "FLUID LEAKS AND DAMAGE CAUSED BY FLUID LEAKS." Here, the repair facility that the customer chose to repair her vehicle advised that the vehicle was experiencing multiple component failures and severe oil leaks. As stated above, those components are not listed for coverage under the customer's Service Contract and also oil leaks and damage caused by oil leaks are specifically not covered. Therefore, those repairs would be the sole responsibility of the customer to repair. After repair of the non-covered components, including all oil leaks, and the “CEL" light cleared, the repair facility would need to retest the vehicle to determine if a timing chain failure was still present with the customer's vehicle.As you can see from the above information, the July 27, 2017 mechanical claim opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle has neither been approved nor denied. CARS is not requesting any undue repairs or tear-down, CARS is just trying to determine the actual failed components of the vehicle to ensure that it is properly repaired the first time.As of this date, CARS is still waiting for the repair of the oil leaks and the noncovered components to determine if there is a remaining issue with the timing chain. If after the repairs are completed and the repair facility confirms any remaining timing chain issues, CARS will then be able to move forward with the claim to determine if the timing chain repair will be covered 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 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

Attached please find CARS' response.RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 AUDIA6VIN (Last 8): 6[redacted]OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated February 18, 2016 enclosing the additional concerns of the customer regarding the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:In her additional concerns the customer states her main reason for her Revdex.com consumer complaint is that CARS is making her responsible for payment of the tear-down and diagnostic charges related to the January 18, 2016 transmission claim made on behalf of her vehicle. By the customer's signature on her Service Contract, she acknowledged that she has read, understood, and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract. It states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 3 (c) "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: A proper diagnosis shall include tear-down to the point ofcomponent 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.”CARS includes 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. CARS is not in any violation of any Consumer Protection Law in Pennsylvania that prohibits the customer from being responsible for tear-down and diagnostic charges. The invoice submitted by the repair facility shows a tear-down charge of $570.00, which is the customer's responsibility.In the customer's additional concerns she questions why CARS did not go over the options for the repair of her vehicle as we did when her vehicle was at the first repair facility. The customer’s Service Contract states at Paragraph 3(a]: "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: Your vehicle must be at a repair facility, within the continental United States, open to the public during normal business hours and capable to: perform tear-down to the point of component failure, determine the cause and extent of damage, and rebuild the component if CARS deems necessary. The vehicle must remain at the repair facility until repairs are complete. CARS reserves the right to have the repairs performed at a location other than the one you have selected."On January 11, 2016 at 2:50 p.m., CARS telephoned the customer to advise that the first repair facility did not perform internal transmission work. We advised that she would have to move hervehicle to a repair facility that is capable of performing internal transmission work. CARS gave examples of repair facilities that perform transmission repairs. CARS would not have been able to move forward with the January 11, 2016 transmission claim if the customer had not moved her vehicle.Additionally, as a courtesy to the customer, CARS further advised that the repair facility's labor rate was $115.95 per hour and her Service Contract paid up to $60.00 per hour and that she might look for a repair facility that had a lower labor rate. Pursuant to the customer's Service Contract the customer has the freedom to decide what repair facility she chooses to take her vehicle to for repair as long as the repair facility is qualified to do the repair work.On January 26, 2016, at 9:31 a.m., after reviewing the repair facility’s estimate (see attached quotation sheet) for a rebuilt transmission, CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the transmission claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply a transmission for $1,000.00. We could also authorize $75.00 towards fluid for the repair. Mitchell OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 8.8 hours to complete and the customer's Service Contract pays up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor covered was $528.00. 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 $1,503.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $428.00 towards labor and $75.00 towards fluids for the repair or pay $1,503.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer's decision.On January 26, 2016 at 10:41 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer chose to take the cash allowance to use towards the repair of her choice. CARS provided the repair facility with an authorization number to begin repairs to the customer’s vehicle.Here, CARS provides the information on the available allowance and/or available supplied parts to the repair facility because the repair facility is our main contact and source of information in making sure the customer's vehicle is properly repaired. This also gives the repair facility the option to discuss other options that that the repair facility may be able to offer the customer using our cash allowance. We provided the repair facility with the above information and requested that the repair facility review the information with the customer. The repair facility advised CARS that the customer chose to use the cash allowance. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must go over the options directly with the customer. We would also like to point out here that the customer did not contact CARS to discuss the cost of her repair until February 2, 2016 after the repair was completed. Any issues regarding the lack of information from the repair facility regarding the options CARS offered to assist with the repair of the customer’s vehicle are between the customer and the repair facility.The customer is also questioning if the transmission in her vehicle is a rebuilt transmission or a used transmission. As stated above the repair facility verbal quote to CARS reflects that they would be rebuilding the transmission in her vehicle; however, the invoice provided to CARS states that the repair facility replaced the engine in her vehicle with a used transmission (see attached invoice).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.As evidenced in the above paragraphs, CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the customer's Service Contract and is unable to provide any further assistance with the January 18, 2016 transmission claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicle.If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Jason [redacted]General Counsel

VIA: EMAIL THROUGH Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2004 TOYOTA TUNDRA VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated, September 21, 2016, enclosing the...

above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On March 30, 2016, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Value Limited Service Contract (24 Months/30,000 Miles). The customer's Service Contract was accepted and approved by CARS on April 25, 2016 (the attached Service Contract).On September 8, 2016 at 1:34 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing steer knuckle, lower ball joint and rear line issues. The repair facility advised CARS that the issues with the vehicle may be the result of an accident. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures.On September 8, 2016 at 2:04 p.m., the repair facility advised a CARS' claims adjustor that the vehicle was driven to the repair for an alignment; however, the customer's vehicle had been in an accident that bent parts on the right and left side of the vehicle. CARS advised that the customer’s Service Contract did not cover any damage resulting from an accident. The claim was then closed.On September 8, 2016 at 2:10 p.m., CARS reviewed the mechanical claim and the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract with the customer. The customer advised that he wished to cancel his Service Contract and was then transferred to the refund department.On September 8, 2016 at 2:15 p.m., CARS advised the customer that pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract, he was not eligible for a refund of his Service Contract.On September 15, 2016 at 3:33 p.m., the customer advised CARS that he no longer had his vehicle and would like a refund of his Service Contract. CARS again advised that pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract, he was not eligible for a refund of his Service Contract. The customer was then transferred to the office manager.On September 19, 2016 at 2:34 p.m., CARS’ office manager advised the customer that he was not eligible for a refund of his Service Contract since his vehicle was not declared a total loss or repossessed.By the customer’s signature on his Service Contract, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. The Service Contract states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1 (1); ‘‘“COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage from flood, fire and/or accident, regardless of the cause.” Here, the repair facility chosen by the customer to repair his vehicle advised CARS on September 21, 2016 that the customer's vehicle had been in an accident which caused the bending of parts on the right and left side of his vehicle.Furthermore, the customer states in his complaint that he is requesting a refund of $1,495.00; however, this is not the amount that CARS received for the cost of the customer's Service Contract. Dealers have the right to mark up the cost of service contracts. The selling dealer that sold the customer the Service Contract did mark up and make a profit on the cost of the Service Contract.The customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph 5(b): "CANCELLATION PROVISIONS: After 20 days, there is no refund for early termination except in the case of a total loss, as determined by the insurance carrier, or repossession by the lienholder as stated."CARS 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 provisions. Here, the customer signed the service contract application when he purchased the above-referenced vehicle stating that he had read, understood and agreed to the terms of the Service Contract. CARS is not directed by any state statute in the state where the customer's vehicle was purchased to refund any monies to the customer for the cancellation of his Service Contract. Therefore, pursuant to his Service Contract the customer is not entitled to a refund.The Service Contract also states at 4(a): "SERVICE CONTRACT PROVISIONS: The ServiceContract is transferable, by the original purchaser of the contract to the subsequent owner of the vehicle provided CARS receives the transfer fee of $99.00 prior to the sale of the vehicle. CARS will not transfer the contract to another vehicle or to a business. The transferred Service Contract will remain in effect for the remainder of the original period.” Here, the customer’s Service Contract is not eligible for a transfer since the customer has traded the above-referenced 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.Sincerely, Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmmAttachment

RE:       COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2005 CHEVY 1500 VIN (Last 8): 51329086 OUR FILE NO.: C-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted] I am in receipt of your letter dated October 13, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On June 5, 2014, 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 June 6, 2014 (the attached "Service Contract"). On October 8, 2015 at 1:41 p.m., a mechanical claim was opened by a repair facility on behalf of the customer's vehicle. The October 8, 2015 claim is the reason for the customer's complaint. CARS management has reviewed the mechanical claim made on behalf of the customer. At this time, CARS is willing to pay the total amount of $937.43, which is the repair facility's cost to repair the customer’s vehicle. Attached please find a copy of the repair facility's invoice for the repair. CARS has also waived the $100.00 deductible. Upon CARS receipt of the final invoice indicating that the repairs are completed and the repair facility has issued a warranty on parts and labor, CARS will pay the claim in the amount of $937.43. I hope that by CARS actions in covering the complete repairs on the customer's vehicle, he finds that CARS' response is satisfactory and the Revdex.com closes this 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 me.Sincerely,Jason [redacted]General Counsel

May 18, 2016VIA: Submitted to Revdex.com website[redacted]RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2002 CHEVY SILVERADO 1500 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:1 am in receipt of your letter dated May 17, 2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to...

our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on February 5, 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 February 5, 2016. The customer’s Service Contract expired on May 8, 2016; however, CARS will pay for the transmission repair pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract since a transmission claim was opened prior to the expiration date of his Service Contract.First Claim: On March 9, 2016 at 2:58 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing purge valve issues. CARS advised the repair facility that the purge valve was a non-covered component under the customer's Service Contract.Second Claim: On April 25, 2016 at 1:19 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility. CARS further advised the repair facility to obtain the customer's authorization to perform a limited teardown on the customer's vehicle to determine the cause of failure and extent of damage to the customer's vehicle. CARS advised that if the limited teardown does not provide the cause of failure then a full teardown would be necessary. CARS further advised that the customer is responsible for all diagnostic and tear-down costs for his vehicle.On April 27, 2016 at 10:56 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that they had found ground metal and clutch material in the transmission pan. CARS then went over the amount we could authorize with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the transmission for $700.00. Demand labor guide stated that the repair should take 7.8 hours to complete and the customer’s service contract pays up to $60.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor covered was $468.00. 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 $1,068.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $368.00 towards labor or pay $1,068.00 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. We then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer's decision.On April 27, 2016 at 10:56 a.m., the customer advised CARS that he was unhappy with the amount CARS was authorizing for the repair of his vehicle. CARS reviewed the transmission claim with the customer. CARS further advised that pursuant to his Service Contract, CARS could only assist with $60.00 per hour for labor and the repair facility chosen by the customer charged $120.00 per hour for labor. The customer advised that he would telephone the repair facility with his decision.On April 29, 2016 at 9:30 a.m., the repair facility advised that the customer would like CARS to ship the transmission to the repair facility. Later that same day, CARS provided an authorization number to the repair facility to begin the repair to the customer's vehicle.On May 10, 2016 at 3:30 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the supplied transmission had no reverse. CARS advised that we would notify our supplier of the problem.On May 11, 2016 at 1:34 p.m., CARS advised the customer that we were checking on the status of the transmission. CARS also reviewed our rental benefits with the customer and advised that he did not qualify for rental benefits pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract.On May 16, 2016 at 9:44 p.m., our supplier advised CARS that the supplied transmission would arrive on May 17, 2016.On May 16, 2016 at 2:36 p.m., CARS advised the customer that the supplied transmission should arrive on May 17, 2016. CARS advised the customer that pursuant to his Service Contract, CARS did not assist with any time lost or inconvenience caused by the loss of his vehicle.The supplied transmission was delivered to the repair facility on May 16, 2016 at 2:55 p.m.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. Here, the customer chose to have CARS supply the transmission to the repair facility for the repair of his vehicle.The customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph 2(m): “PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: C.A.R.S. will not be responsible for any time lost, any inconvenience caused by the loss of use of Your vehicle, the quality of the repair by the repair facility or for any other incidental or consequential damages You may have.” CARS has no control over our suppliers shipping dates or errors in shipping; however we do have an obligation to the customer to ensure that we make every effort to ensure that the customer’s vehicle is repaired as quickly as possible. As stated above are supplied parts are to be tested by our suppliers; however, the supplied transmission was not working properly when installed into customer’s vehicle. Here, in a goodwill gesture, CARS is waiving the $100.00 deductible for the transmission claim.It is stated at Paragraph 2(C): 'PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: The Service Contract does NOT go into effect until: fl) this application is_received by CARS Protection Plus, Inc. ("CARS”), (2) with proper payment, and f31 approved bv 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 expired on May 8, 2016; therefore, since the claim was opened prior to the expiration of the customer's Service Contract, CARS will assist with the transmission claim pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract. However, the supplied transmission will not have coverage beyond once the transmission claim is closed.The rental benefits of the customer’s service contract states: "The Service Contract Holder will be reimbursed $25.00 for each eight hours of ProDemand labor guide time to repair or replace the covered component with a maximum benefit of $300.00 per claim, if proof of rental is provided with an authorized claim. Down time, regardless of reason, is not included.” Here, as stated above the time to repair the covered components (transmission) was 7.8 hours based on ProDemand Labor Guide; which would not have entitled the customer any reimbursement towards rental expenses. However, in a goodwill gesture, CARS will issue the customer a check for $200.00 which represents additional eight (8) days that it took for a second supplied transmission to arrive at the repair facility.The customer Service Contract states: "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 offailure." Here, the customer refers to a claim opened in April; however, the only claim opened prior to the April 25, 2016 claim was on March 9, 2016 for purge valve issues. The purge valve is not listed for coverage under the customer's Service Contract.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. CARS apologizes for any inconvenience that the delay in the arrival of second supplied transmission has caused the customer. Although CARS had no control over the shipping time of the supplied parts or the failure of the first supplied transmission, in a goodwill gesture, CARS is paying the customer for eight (8) days of rental benefits and waiving the $100.00 deductible.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.

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]

October 2, 2015VIA:    SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITE RE:       COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2005 CHEVROLET IMPALA VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am in receipt of your letter dated September 28, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced...

complaint. Our records reflect that the person filing this Complaint is not the owner of the service contract. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jason *. M[redacted]General Counsel

PROTECTION PLUS Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated March 20, 2017, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:CARS has contacted the customer and advised that in a goodwill gesture, CARS will issue the customer's lienholder a prorated refund of the...

amount that CARS received for the customer's Service Contract. CARS will also advise the selling dealer of the prorated portion that they are responsible to pay the customer's lienholder. CARS is waiting on the customer to provide the lienholder's information so that we may process our portion of the refund.CARS 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 my office.

Problem:I had previously filed a complaint with the Revdex.com over repairs that they state they did not cover on their contract, but I believe it is. In December after this complaint I received a cancellation form from the company with a post it note telling me they could not refund my 4 year payment to them without the form. I completed the form and sent it certified mail. Within 10 days of sending this form I received a letter stating they could not refund my money as it was past the 20 days of the contract. . I would not have cancelled the policy (a 4 year policy) if I had known they would not refund the remainder of my policy money. I am only 6 months into a 4 year contract with them. I would have continued to file a complaint for every repair they denied for the next four years. So now they get to keep $l,000 of a 4 year contract and it's cancelled??? This company should not be in business.Desired Outcome:Refund my policy money or reestablish the contract so I can continue to file claims.

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 was told by Cars Protection Plus Representative that if I chose to have my car repaired I would be reimbursed for 50% of the Labor and 50 % of approved parts.  I needed to get my vehicle out of the body shop so I would have a car to drive over the weekend since I was in a bind, therefore I paid the body shop thinking in good faith I would be able to use the warranty to recover part of my expenses.  I paid $895 towards the repair. The Cars Protection Plus Warranty is misleading and it was implied to me by both Cars Protection Plus Warranty and the dealer I would only be responsible for 50 % of repairs and labor.  The way the warranty is written, Cars Protection Plus can easily get out of doing any repairs to the vehicle, it does not specifically state that O2 Sensors is not a covered part, it list other parts that are covered and parts that are not and then gives them the opportunity to say any part not listed is not covered. I have decided to refer this to the [redacted] Attorney General Office of Consumer Protection to file a complaint.  ]
Regards,
[redacted]

I am in receipt of your letter dated April 30, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: According to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on February 17, 2014. On that same date he also applied for a CARS...

Value Limited Service Contract (24 Months/30,000 Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on February 18, 2014 (See attached Service Contract). On April 8, 2015 at 2:33 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from the customer advising that his vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. A customer service representative reviewed with the customer, his coverage, criteria for a repair facility, and our claim procedures. On April 13, 2015 at 9:29 a.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. A customer service representative reviewed the customer's coverage and claim procedures with the repair facility. On April 15 2015 at 10:14 a.m., CARS received a telephone call from another repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility. On April 15, 2015 at 11:27 a.m., a claim adjuster attempted to call the person at that repair facility that opened the claim on behalf of the customer’s vehicle; however, he was advised that that person would not be in until the next day. On April 16, 2015 at 10:55 a.m., CARS reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility. The repair facility advised CARS that there was a "chatter noise:" coming from the transmission. CARS then advised the repair facility to obtain the customer's permission to tear the vehicle down to the point of component failure and get back to us with their findings and an estimate for repair. Twelve (12) days later, on April 28, 2015 at 9:26 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the torque converter failed which sent metal through the unit. On April 28, 2015 at 11:02 a.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 transmission for $650.00. Mitchell’s OnDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 6.5 hours to complete and the customer's service contract pays up to $50.00 per hour. Therefore, total labor covered was $325.00. 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 $875.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $225.00 towards labor or pay $875.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. We also advised the repair facility that it should take four (4) to five (5) business days for any supplied parts to get the repair facility. We then asked the repair facility to get back us with the customer’s decision. By the customer’s signature on the Service Contract, he acknowledged that he has read, understood, and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of his Service Contract. It states under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 3 (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 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 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 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 $50.00 per hour. Should your repair facility's rate exceed this amount, you are responsible for the difference.” On the estimate faxed to CARS on April 28, 2015 (attached) the repair facility lists the cost of labor as $95.00 per hour. As stated above, Mitchell’s OnDemand Labor Guide states the repair to the customer's vehicle should have taken 6.5 hours to repair and his Service Contract will pay $50.00 per hour for the labor charges; therefore, CARS is able to pay $325.00 if the customer chooses to use the repair facilities parts and $225.00 if the customer chooses to use our supplied parts. Pursuant the customer's Service Contract, the customer is responsible for the difference. It states in bold 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 in excess of coverage outlined under Labor and Diagnostics.” 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. It is stated at Paragraph 2 (j): "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’s claim is subject to a $100.00 deductible as per his Service Contract. 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. We would like to point out here that it took the repair facility twelve (12) days to get back to CARS with the cause of failure to the customer’s vehicle. Once the cause of failure was provided to us, CARS provided the amount we could assist with for the repair of the customer's vehicle the same day. For all these reasons above, CARS is unable to provide any additional assistance with the repair of the customer's vehicle. Once the repair facility gives us the customer’s decision on which option for assistance he would like to use to repair his vehicle, CARS will provide an authorization number to the repair facility to begin the repairs to 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. Sincerely, [redacted] General Counsel [redacted] Attachment

RE:       COMPLAINT ID [redacted] 2003 FORD F150 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am in receipt of your letter dated December 30, 2014, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond in the following manner: According...

to our records, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle on December 6, 2014. On that same date he applied for a CARS Power Train Service Contract (3 Months/4,500 Miles) which was received by CARS and approved with payment on December 10. 2014. (See attached Service Contract). On December 30, 2014 at 9:45 a.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising us that the vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility. On December 30, 2014 at 10:06 a.m., in a recorded telephone call with a CARS customer service representative, the customer stated that his vehicle started experiencing heating issues when leaving the dealership on the date of purchase of December 6, 2014. The customer then stated that the selling dealer replaced the thermostat, but the customer felt however, that this did not fix the problem. During this same conversation the customer also stated he took the vehicle to another repair facility on December 13, 2014 where they did a pressure check. The new repair facility advised that the head gasket was bad and they also noticed the vehicle had a new water pump. The customer advised that he checked the vehicle's oil which looked white and milky on the oil fill cap. On December 30, 2014 at 10:34 a.m., we received a telephone call from the repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues, specifically the head gasket. The vehicle was losing coolant, oil was dripping from the rear of the motor, a light was out in the dash, and the head gasket was leaking oil and coolant. During that telephone conversation we advised the repair facility that pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract, CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the vehicle. On December 30, 2014 at 11:06 a.m. the customer was advised by CARS that the head gasket failure was in progress prior to CARS’ acceptance of the customer's service contract application. It was explained thoroughly to the customer that pursuant to the terms and conditions of the customer's service contract, CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the vehicle. Please be advised that by the customer's signature on his service contract application, he read, understood, and agreed to the covered components terms and conditions. Directly above the customer's signature it states, as well as under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 2 (c): "This 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.” Additionally, under the Terms and Conditions at Paragraphs 1(b): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Component failures occurring before CARS. Protection Plus, Inc. ("CARS") approves this Service Contract application are NOT covered. CARS does NOT warrant the vehicle at the time of purchase." In summary, during the December 30, 2014 recorded telephone call, the customer stated that he began to experience mechanical issues on the same date of the vehicle purchase. Also, his consumer complaint verified that the vehicle was experiencing these issues at the time of purchase. Please be advised that CARS service contracts are to be utilized for failures that occur during the coverage period, not for failures that are present on the date of purchase. Here, even though the claim was not opened until December 30, 2014, the customer's head gasket issues were present and in progress when the customer purchased the vehicle on December 6, 2014. 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. Therefore, CARS stands behind our original decision and is unable to assist with the December 30, 2014, head gasket claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle. However, the customer has service contract coverage on his vehicle through March 10, 2015 or 149,477 miles, 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 customer's 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 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.This explanation is the exacting reason of the problem.  They say it took them 12 days to get back to them from the origination of the initial claim.....what does that have to do with anything.  My truck is not the only truck in his shop.  It wouldn't of been there had they did what a warranty is designed to do.  A warranty replaces a defective product which is what this claim is.  The transmission has a torque converter problem which caused failure.  They can say all they want about what the process is but they offered a transmission to the shop of 675.00.  According to the shop there's NO TRANSMISSION ON EARTH that's any good for 675.00.  At best a rebuilt decent one is MINIMAL 2300.00.  The shop I took it too has a impeccable reputation and was recommended by my former shop that didn't have the facilities to tear down a transmission.  Even the shop I took it to had to send it out to be cut open to get to the point of failure.  Which I firmly believe this process is in effect to frustrate the warranty holder in hopes they just get the process over with.  Additionally I dare them to find 1 transmission shop they forced me to take it to that charges $50/hr.  Just because that's what their policy is doesn't make it a good one.  They caused every delay with how their policy goes.  Why I'm even paying for anything on top of the deductible is ridiculous.  A deductible is something an insurance company does not a warranty company.  If they had just authorized the replacement which was determined at the beginning of April my truck would be fixed but that wouldn't be profitable.  They can hide behind all of their policy claim mumbo jumbo they want and I am not claiming that I read it and didn't agreed to it....I am saying that if I had there would of been no chance I would have agreed to it.  I did sign off that I agreed to it and I'm not denying that either.  I went to a respectable dealership and beleived that I was getting a decent warranty and wouldnt have to read it but this is obviously not the case.  The bottom line here is I can plainly see what their policy is on repairs....Im objecting to it being not a fair business practice and their also their labor rates seriously outdated.  Also I'd like to emphasize my point about the replacement transmission they were going to provide the shop.  675.00 for a transmission is not even anywhere close to what it costs for one....even a rebuilt one.  The shop has promised me a 14 month guarantee on the transmission....not some 5 dollar transmission the warranty company was going to "find" at some bargain basement God knows where place.  Im out of pocket for $1000 which includes the "deductible" for a transmission that probably will out live the truck, but at least I know it will function and where the parts came from.  If this is not resolved I'll file a review on every site I can find and make sure people do not make the same mistake I did about this company by not reading the all the rules of every little section of their worthless warranty.  
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.
Regards,
Richard Atkins
Most of what CARS said is absolutely true except for the part of offering $371.98 to me to pay. I was told that CARS would pay Mercedes the $371.98 to the dealership not me leaving me with a balance of over $1000 to pay out of pocket. Even though they state that their parts are to OE specs, once their parts are put on my vehicle, its voids everything on the vehicle and prevents holding Mercedes for any other failures in the event of a recall or other issues. When I got the CARS contract from the dealership, I was provided with a yellow carbon copy with only the first page. From the time of purchase, I have never had anything showing the terms and conditions on the contact, and CARS also have a recorded record of me calling on two separate occasions requesting information explaining what those terms were and what I am covered for. They only thing I ever received directly from them was a hard cardstock sheet enclosed with a car that says I have a warranty with them, nothing of the terms or what I was covered for. Again, my issues was not disagreeing with what the terms of their contract was, it was getting my vehicle fixed with the same parts that malfunctioned which were original OEM. Its easy to there and accept aftermarket part and yes it might be warrantied by CARS, but I am looking at the overall effect which is how it voids everything else on my vehicle.

RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2007 [redacted] VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:     I am in receipt of your letter dated July 30, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our records the customer purchased the...

above-referenced vehicle on January 7, 2014 and on that same date he applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (48 Months/Unlimited Miles). The same was accepted with payment by CARS on that same day, January 16, 2014 (the attached "Service Contract"). The customer has Service Contract coverage through January 16, 2018.     CARS was able to reach the customer via the email address he provided on his Revdex.com complaint to verify his Service Contract Coverage. The customer's replacement ID card was mailed to him today, August 4, 2015. For this reason, we believe this matter to be resolved.     CARS' normal business hours are Monday through Thursday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and on Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Messages can be left for CARS during non-business hours and telephone calls will be returned the next business day. We have provided the customer with an email address for my office if he experiences any issues with his ID card.     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 [redacted] General Counsel[redacted]Attachment