Fox Concrete

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

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.

[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: Complaint No. [redacted]2002 JEEP LIBERTY VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms[redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated October 13, 2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint. I...

would like to respond in the following manner: On December 26, 2014, the customer purchased 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 30, 2014 (see attached Service Contract).Two (2) claims have been opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle since the inception of her Service Contract.First Claim: On March 19, 2015 at 1:50 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing front differential and axle issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On March 19, 2015 at 2:00 p.m., the repair facility advised that there was a noise in the front differential and the rear axle moved up and down. CARS again reviewed our claim procedures.CARS advised the repair facility to obtain the customer's authorization to tear-down her vehicle to the point of failure to verify the cause of failure and extent of damage to her vehicle. CARS further advised that the customer was responsible for all tear-down/diagnostic charges pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract.On March 20, 2015 at 10:35 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the prop shaft and rear right front axle were worn. The repair facility advised that there were no problems with the rear differential. The repair facility then faxed an estimate for the repair of the customer's vehicle to CARS.On March 23, 2015 at 9:14 a.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the repair of the customer's vehicle as follows: We could supply the front right prop for $275.00 and rear front axle for $65.00. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 1.7 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $102.00. 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 $342.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $2.00customer’s Service Contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $102.00. 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 $342.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $2.00 towards labor or pay $342.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. The repair facility advised that they would inform us of the customer's decision.On March 24, 2015 at 2:36 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer would take the cash allowance towards the repair of her choice. On March 24, 2015 at 2:53 p.m., CARS provided an authorization for the repair facility to begin work on the customer's vehicle.Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS paid the repair facility $342.00 via credit card towards the repair of the customer's vehicle. The claim was then closed.Second Claim: On October 13, 2016 at 9:59 a.m., a repair facility advised CARS that thecustomer's vehicle was experiencing spark plug, #1 ignition coil and catalytic converter issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On October 13, 2016 at 10:43 a.m., CARS advised the repair facility that spark plugs and the catalytic converter were non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract. CARS then went over the #1 ignition coil portion of the claim with the repair facility. We could supply the #1 ignition for $18.44. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take .5 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $60.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $30.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained the total value of claim ($48.44) was less than the customer’s deductible of $100.00; therefore, CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the customer's vehicle. The claim was then closed.By the customer's signature on her Value Plus Service Contract she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract. It is stated in the Service Contract at Paragraph 3 (f): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: CARS has the right to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, or aftermarket components when authorizing repairs." When CARS selected the above-mentioned replacement parts we 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. Here, during the processing of the March 19, 2015 claim, the customer chose to take the cash allowance towards the repair of her vehicle.On October 13, 2016 at 1:19 p.m., the customer advised CARS that she would like to cancel her Service Contract coverage. CARS advised that her Service Contract had been active for twenty-two (22) months and CARS paid a claim for $324.00; therefore there was no refund available for early termination.It is stated in the Service Contract: "COVERED COMPONENTS: COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVECOMPONENTS." 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 spark plugs and catalytic converter 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 her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible.In her consumer complaint the customer states that she would like a refund of her 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, the customer cancelled her Service Contract on October 13, 2016 which is greater than twenty (20) days from the date of Service Contract approval date of December 30, 2015.The Service Contract states: ADDITIONAL STATE DISCLOSURES: THIS IS NOT AN INSURANCE POLICY [redacted]: If a claim has been made under the contract during the first 20 business day (free look period) and the contract is returned, the provider shall refund to the contract holder the full purchase price less any claims paid. The applicable free look time period on the Service Contract shall pertain only to the original Service Contract purchaser.After the free look period, a Service Contract holder may cancel the contract at any time and the provider shall refund to the contract holder 100% of the unearned pro rata provider fee, less any claims made. A reasonable administrative fee may be surcharged by the provider in an amount not to exceed $50.00.Here, the customer has had Service Contract coverage for twenty-two months and CARS paid a claim in the amount of $342.00; therefore, she is not entitled to any refund of her Service Contract.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 her Service Contract (i.e. $2,195.00) is not what CARS received for the cost of her Service ContractThe customer has Service Contract coverage through December 30, 2016. If a claim is opened CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under the customer's 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 Value 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 question, please contact my office.Sincerely,

VIA: EMAIL/WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania [redacted]RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 BMW 750LI VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letters dated December 7, 2016, and December 8, 2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer's additional complaints and respond as follows:On December 2, 2016, the customer emailed CARS the Vehicle Care Package and Multi-Point Inspection Form prepared by BMW of [redacted]On December 7, 2016, CARS advised the customer in the attached letter that a claim must be opened on behalf of her vehicle so that CARS can determine if the repair to the customer's vehicle would be covered under her Service Contract. CARS also sent the attached check for the customer's towing expenses.On December 7, 2016 at 2:39 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS of the issues with the customer's vehicle. At this time, the customer's claim is being processed by CARS. CARS is currently waiting on the repair facility to get back to us with an estimate for repairs.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.Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmmAttachment

Attached please find CARS'...

response.March 24, 2016VIA: SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITERE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2001 DODGE 2500 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: C-[redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]1 am in receipt of your letter dated March 24, 2016 advising CARS of the above-referenced consumer additional concerns. I would like to respond in the following manner:The customer states in his March 23, 2016 reply to the Revdex.com regarding our March 22, 2016 response letter that he would like to know what happens next during the processing of his claim.By the customer’s signature, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. The Service Contract states under Terms and Conditions 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 is covered. This increases the probability that the vehicle will be repaired properly the first time. We are not requiring unnecessary tear-down and diagnosis; we are only trying to determine the cause of failure. As stated in our previous letter, CARS advised the repair facility on February 29, 2016 and March 4, 2016 that in order for CARS to move forward with the processing of the customer’s claim, the repair facility must let CARS know the cause of failure and the extent of damage to the customer's vehicle. As of today, March 24, 2016, the repair facility has not provided that information to CARS.It states at Paragraph 1(c): “1. COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Any repair done without prior authorization from CARS." The service contract further states at 3(e) and 3(g): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURE: The repair facility must provide CARS with an estimate and obtain an authorization number BEFORE any repairs have begun, and "....No invoice will be processed without a valid authorization number, your signature, repair facility’s warranty on repairs (if applicable) and repair facility’s identifying information." The claim procedures outlined on the customer’s Service Contract are the same claim procedures that all CARS' customers must follow in order for the claim to be properly opened, authorized and paid, if it is determined that the repairs are covered under the customers’ service contract.Additionally, at Paragraph 1(c): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Any repair done without prior authorization from C.A.R.S." All CARS customers must follow and adhere to the claim procedures above listed for their claims to be processed. CARS will provide an authorization number to the repair facility for repair of the customer's vehicle when it is determined that the failure of the customer’s vehicle is covered under the customer's Service Contract.CARS would like to point out here that the claim procedures have been reviewed with the repair facility chosen by the customer to repair his vehicle on February 24, 2016, February 29, 2016 and March 4, 2016.Additionally, on March 22, 2016 at 4:18 p.m., and March 23, 2016 at 9:25 a.m., CARS left voice messages for the repair facility to find out the status of the customer's engine claim.As stated in our March 22, 2016 letter, 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, it is necessary for the repair facility to provide CARS with a proper diagnosis and extent of damage to the customer's vehicle as stated in the above paragraphs. CARS cannot move forward with the engine claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle until the repair facility provides CARS with the cause of failure to the engine and the extent of damages to the customer’s vehicle.If you have any further question, please contract my office.Sincerely,JPM/jmmAttachment

May 3, 2016 VIA:    First Class Mail [redacted] RE:       Revdex.com COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] APRIL 11, 2016 TRANSMISSION CLAIM 2008 CHEVY IMPALA VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted] Enclosed...

please find our check no. [redacted], in the amount of $225.00, representing full and final settlement of the above-referenced matter.

August 12, 2015VIA: ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH Revdex.com WEBSITERE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2003 [redacted] VIN (Last [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated August 11, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: According to our...

records on July 20, 2015, after CARS received the transfer of ownership and payment for the transfer, a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (24 Months/Unlimited Miles) was transferred to the customer by the original purchaser of the Service Contract (See attached "Service Contract”).On August 7, 2015, at 1:41 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from the repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing rear differential and tie rod issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On August 7, 2015, at 2:01 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that a growling noise was coming from the rear differential and fluid had leaked from the pinion seal. The repair facility further advised that the cause of failure was the pinion seal. The repair facility was to fax an estimate with the cause of failure to CARS. However, the faxed estimate did not have a cause of failure to the customer's vehicle listed.On August 7, 2015 at 4:04 p.m., in a recorded call the repair facility advised CARS that the cause of failure was the pinion seal.On August 7, 2015 at 4:12 p.m., CARS advised the repair facility that pursuant to the customer's Service Contract coverage, CARS was unable to assist with the repair to the customer's vehicle because the pinion seal is a non-covered component under the customer's Service Contract.By the customer's signature on her Value Plus Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract. It is stated in the service contract: "COVERED COMPONENTS: COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVECOMPONENTS.” and under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a) and 1(f): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure." and"Damage/failure to a covered component caused by a non-covered component." Here, the pinion seal is not listed for coverage. The pinion (non-covered component) caused damage to the rear differential (covered component): therefore, it is the customer's responsibility to repair the pinion seal and any damage caused by the pinion seal.The customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph l(q): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Fluid leaks and damage caused by fluid leaks." The pinion seal leak caused the damage to the rear differential.Under the customer's Service Contract, we were not required to cover the full cost of the repair. The customer's 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 components are specifically covered and their financial responsibility for the tear-down, diagnosis charges, filters, and taxes.For these reasons, CARS stands by its decision and is unable to offer any assistance with the August 7, 2015 claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicle pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract.The customer has Service Contract coverage through September 12, 2015. CARS will review any claims opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle and if the failures are covered pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract, CARS will pay accordingly. 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

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. 
Regards,
[redacted]

When I first spoke with the company I told them we noticed the problems a day or 2 after I purchased the car but I was wrong my husband called the company and clarified that he did not drive the vehicle until March 5th thats when he noticed the problems. Cars protection representativ told him to email the new information and I did telling them that I had the dates wrong and they said they would re review the case based on thst infor.ation and they never did. They closed the case without even taking into consideration that I had the dates wrong. The issues did not arise until March 5th and then we immediately took the vehicle in the next day March 6th to aamco.

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]

December 13, 2016VIA: EMAIL THROUGH Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 SCION TC VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated December 7, 2016, enclosing...

the above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On September 30, 2016, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a Power Train Service Contract (6 Months/7,500 Mile) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on September 30, 2016 (the attached "Service Contract").On October 31, 2016 at 10:41 a.m., the customer advised CARS that her vehicle shut down while driving and would not start. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures and her Service Contract coverage.On November 8, 2016 at 3:49 p.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing engine, radiator, water pump and upper and lower radiator hose issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On November 8, 2016 at 4:48 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was towed to the repair facility on November 4, 2016. The repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle started to lose power, sputter and white smoke was coming from the rear of the vehicle. The repair facility advised that the vehicle then made a clucking noise and then would not start. The repair facility then advised that both radiator hoses blew off and the serpentine belt was covered in oil. The repair facility further advised that the customer continued to drive the vehicle and melted all the plastic that was attached to the engine.On November 9, 2016 at 10:54 a.m., in a recorded telephone call, the repair facility advised CARS that the radiator in the customer's vehicle was new. The repair facility advised CARS that the technician believed that when the radiator was replaced the coolant system was not properly bleed and pressure built causing the hoses to blow off the radiator which subsequently caused the engine to overheat. The repair facility further advised that the customer stated that there was no indication that the vehicle was driven in an overheated condition.On November 9, 2016 at 4:56 p.m., CARS advised the repair facility that CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the customer's vehicle because the issues to the customer's vehicle were caused by the radiator, radiator hoses and/or an improper previous repair. The radiator and radiator hoses are non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract. The customer's Service Contract does not cover any failures or damage caused by an improper previous repair.On November 17, 2016 at 9:47 a.m., a claims manager advised the customer that CARS was unable to assist with the repair of the customer's vehicle because the issues to the customer's vehicle were caused by the radiator, radiator hoses and/or an improper previous repair. The radiator and radiator hoses are non-covered components under the customer's Service Contract. The customer's Service Contract does not cover any failures or damage caused by an improper previous repair. The customer advised that she would like a refund of her Service Contract.On November 17, 2016 at 10:43 a.m., CARS advised the customer that she was not eligible for a refund under her Service Contract.By the customer's signature on her Power Train Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. The customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph 1 (i): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage resulting from any previous improper repair." Based on the findings of the repair facility provided to CARS during the recorded telephone calls on November 8, 2016, CARS determined that the failures to the customer's vehicle were caused by the failure of the radiator, radiator hoses and/or an improper previous repair due to the air not being bled during the replacement of the cooling system.It is stated in the service contract under terms and conditions at Paragraph 1 (f): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage/failure to a covered component caused by failure of a NON-covered component." Here, the repair facility chosen by the customer to repair her vehicle found that the failures of non-covered components (i.e. radiator, radiator hoses) caused the engine to overheat causing the failure of a covered component (i.e. engine).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." Additionally, under Virginia the customer is not eligible for a refund of her 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 her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible. Accordingly, CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract; therefore, we stand behind our decision and are unable to assist with the November 8, 2016 mechanical claim for the reasons stated above.The customer has Service Contract coverage on her vehicle through March 30, 2017. Should the customer's vehicle incur future mechanical problems, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under the customer's 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 my office.Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmmAttachment

April 12, 2016VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITERE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2001 LEXUS GS300 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I received your letter dated April 8, 2016, enclosing the customer’s concerns contained in the above-referenced consumer complaint. Our records indicate that on February...

15, 2015, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle and on that same date, he also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (24 Months/Unlimited Miles), which was accepted with payment by CARS on March 24, 2015 (the attached "Service Contract”).FIRST CLAIM: On March 15, 2016 at 2:48 p.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing radiator, radiator cap and thermostat issues. We then went over our claims procedures with the repair facility.During the processing of the customer's claim, on March 15, 2016 at 3:23 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the customer’s claim as follows: We could supply the radiator for $83.93 and the thermostat for $7.90. CARS could also assist with the coolant needed for the repair of the customer's vehicle in the amount of $28.00. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 2.7 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $70.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $189.00. 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 $117.00, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $89.00 towards labor or pay $117.00 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. The repair facility advised that they would telephone us back with your decision.On March 15, 2016 at 4:05 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer wanted CARS to supply the parts to the repair facility for the repair of his vehicle. We then provided the repair facility with an authorization number for the repair and an estimated delivery date for the supplied parts of March 18, 2016. Since the repair facility telephoned CARS after 4:00 p.m., CARS was not able to place an order for the supplied parts until March 16, 2016.On March 21, 2016 at 10:21 a.m., the customer advised CARS that the supplied parts had not arrived at the repair facility. CARS advised the customer that our supplier would telephone the repair facility with an update on the arrival time of the supplied parts. As evidenced by the attached shipping and tracking information, the supplied parts arrived at the repair facility on March 21, 2016 at 1:29 p.m.On March 23, 2016, CARS paid the repair facility $117.00 via credit card pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract for labor relating to the supplied radiator and thermostat. On April 11, 2015, CARS paid our parts supplier $131.83 via credit card pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer’s Service Contract for a radiator and thermostat. The claim was then closed.On April 6, 2016 at 9:35 a.m., the customer advised CARS that during an inspection of his vehicle, a repair facility advised him that the radiator fan was broken and the check engine light was displayed when the repair facility attempted to repair the radiator fan. The customer advised CARS that the repair facility that replaced his radiator damaged the fan because the fan was not like this prior to the replacement of the radiator. CARS advised the customer that the repair facility who previously replaced the radiator was responsible to repair/replace the radiator since they damaged the repair facility.SECOND CLAIM: On April 7, 2016 at 11:36 a.m., we received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing water pump issues. We then went over our claims procedures with the repair facility.On April 7, 2016 at 11:55 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was towed to the repair facility with low coolant and a cracked expansion tank which is part of the fan assembly. The repair facility further advised that the customer told them that the expansion tank (fan assembly) was not covered by CARS due to the previous repair facility damaging the fan assembly during the radiator replacement. The repair facility recommended that the timing belt be replaced. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.During the processing of the customer's claim, on April 7, 2016 at 12:01 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the customer's claim as follows: We could supply the water pump for $54.79. CARS could also assist with the coolant needed for the repair of the customer’s vehicle in the amount of $12.00. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 3.8 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $70.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $266.00. 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 $232.79, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $166.00 towards labor or pay $232.79 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. The repair facility advised that the customer would take the cash allowance towards the repair of his choice. We then provided the repair facility with an authorization number to begin the repairs to the customer’s vehicle.On April 7, 2016 at 4:24 p.m., CARS advised the customer that we could not assist with the replacement of the timing belt because it had not failed. The repair facility had recommended the timing belt be replaced as a maintenance item. We further advised that it was his responsibility to take care of all maintenance pertaining to his vehicle.By the customer's signature on his Value Plus Service Contract, the customer acknowledged that he read, understood, and agreed to the terms and conditions of thehis service contract. 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 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. The customer chose to have the radiator and thermostat shipped to the repair facility. Here, CARS provided the repair facility with an estimated delivery date for the arrival of the supplied parts; however, we have no control over any shipping delays with the supplier or the carrier.The customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph 1 (i): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Damage resulting from any previous improper repair." Based on the information provided to CARS by the customer and the second repair facility, the repair facility that performed the repairs to the customer vehicle during the March 15, 2016 claim, damaged the expansion tank (radiator fan] during the repair of the customer’s vehicle. Therefore, the first repair facility is responsible for the replacement of the radiator fan pursuant to the customer’s Service Contract.The customer’s Service Contract also states under the Terms and Conditions at 2 (h) and 3 (g): "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: You are responsible for properly maintain the vehicle in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications and to protect against further damage caused by continued operation or damage from overheating." and "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: "If it is determined that a coveredcomponent has failed and an estimate for the repairs is approved by C.A.R.S., an authorization number will be issued for the repair." Here, the repair facility recommended that the timing belt be replaced; however, the timing belt had not failed; therefore, pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the Service Contract, the replacement of the timing belt would be considered maintenance and not covered under the customer's Service Contract.However, in a goodwill gesture, on April 8, 2016, CARS telephoned the repair facility and authorized an additional $25.00 for the April 7, 2016 mechanical claim, which was the amount we would pay our supplier for a timing belt.In his consumer complaint the customer states that he has incurred additional rental expense due to the radiator and thermostat arriving at the repair facility one (1] business day later than the estimated delivery date. 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." Also the service contract states at Paragraph 2(m): "PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: C.A.R.S. will not beresponsible 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." Here, as stated above the time to repair the covered components (radiator and thermostat] was 2.7 hours based on ProDemand Labor Guide; therefore, the customer is not entitled to any rental benefits. However, in a goodwill gesture, CARS will issue the customer a check for $75.00 towards the cost of his rental expenses.In summary, the customer's Service Contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and his financial responsibility for the teardown, filters, fluids, taxes, and the difference in labor rates.For the above reasons, CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the 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.JPM/jmmAttachment

May 25, 2017VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted] Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID# [redacted]2008 PONTIAC G6 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated May 22, 2017, enclosing the...

above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:According to our records, the customers purchased the above-referenced vehicle on April 20, 2016. On that same date the customers also applied for a CARS Value Plus Service Contract (36 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on May 2, 2016. (See attached “Service Contract")Since the inception of the customers' Service Contract, three (3) mechanical claims were opened on behalf of the customers' vehicle as follows:First Claim: On June 10, 2016 at 2:04 p.m., a repair facility contacted CARS advising that the customers' vehicle was experiencing front strut, mount brackets, bearings and tie rod issues. During that initial telephone call, CARS advised the repair facility that the components requiring repair were non-covered components under the customers' Service Contract; therefore, CARS would not be able to assist with the repairs. The claim was then closed by CARS.On that same date at 4:06 p.m. the customer contacted CARS inquiring about the claim. CARS advised that customer that the components requiring repair were noncovered components pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of their Service Contract; therefore, CARS would not be able to assist with the repairs.Second Claim: On April 28, 2017 at 10:26 a.m., a repair facility contacted CARS advising that the customers' vehicle was experiencing right front lower control arm/ball joint issues.On April 28, 2017 at 10:36 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS they found the right front lower ball joint had excessive play and needed replaced. The repair facility then stated there were no other issues with the customers' vehicle.During that same telephone call, CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim as follows: We would supply a control arm with ball joint for $90.73. ProDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 1.2 hours to complete. The customers' Service Contract pays up to $70.00 per hour for labor; therefore, total labor was $84.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the authorized claim after the deductible was applied was $74.73. CARS further explained to the repair facility that the customers had two (2) choices for assistance with the approved claim: CARS could either supply the part as stated above or the customers could take the cash allowance totaling $74.73 to be used towards the specifically-authorized repair. If it was the customers' decision for CARS to ship our supplied part, CARS would be unable to assist with any labor due to the $100.00 deductible. CARS then advised the repair facility to obtain the customers' decision on how to proceed with the claim.On April 28, 2017 at 2:11 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from the customer requesting cancellation and refund of the Service Contract. During that telephone call, CARS advised the customer they could cancel the Service Contract coverage; however, pursuant to the Cancellation Provisions of the Service Contract, the customers would not be entitled to any refund, since the request was past twenty (20) days of Service Contract acceptance and the vehicle was not declared a total loss or repossessed by the lienholder. CARS advised the customer that the vehicle had Service Contract coverage through May 2, 2019. The customer then stated that they would keep the Service Contract coverage.On May 3, 2017 and May 5, 2017, CARS attempted to reach the repair facility regarding the customers' decision, so that CARS could move forward with the claim. On both dates, CARS left voicemail messages for the repair facility to call CARS back.This was the last communication that CARS had with the repair facility or the customers regarding the April 28, 2017 claim.Third Claim: On May 18, 2017 at 1:08 p.m., the same repair facility from the April 28, 2017 claim, contacted CARS advising that the customers' vehicle was experiencing the same right front lower control arm/ball joint issues, along with rear trailing arms, right front stabilizer link, left axle seal, transmission cooler lines and front brakes issues.On that same date at 1:27 p.m., the repair facility stated that they found the power steering control module, tie rod ends, front right lower control arm/ball joint, rear trailing arms, right from stabilizer link and transmission cooler lines were in need of replacement. The repair facility also stated that the vehicle needed an alignment.During that same telephone call, CARS advised the repair facility that the power steering control module, tie rod ends, rear trailing arms, right front stabilizer link, transmission cooler lines and the alignment were non-covered components under the customers' Service Contract. However, CARS would be able to assist with repair of the front right lower control arm/ball joint repair as follows: We would supply a control arm with ball joint for $90.98. ProDemand labor guide stated that the repair should take 1.2 hours to complete. The customers' Service Contract pays up to $70.00 per hour for labor; therefore, total labor was $84.00. The claim was also subject to a $100.00 deductible. We explained that the total value of the authorized claim after the deductible was applied was $74.98. CARS further explained to the repair facility that the customers had two (2) choices for assistance with the approved claim: CARS could either supply the part as stated above or the customers could take the cash allowance totaling $74.98 to be used towards the specifically-authorized repair. If it was the customers' decision for CARS to ship our supplied part, CARS would be unable to assist with any labor due to the $100.00 deductible. CARS then advised the repair facility to obtain the customers' decision on how to proceed with the claim.During that telephone call, the repair facility chosen by the customers' to repair the vehicle expressed their displeasure with CARS' claim allowance and ended the call. CARS then attempted to reach the supervisor at the repair facility; however, since he was unavailable, CARS left a voicemail message advising him of the amount CARS could offer for the claim and to contact CARS with the customers' decision, so we could move forward with the claim.On May 19, 2017, CARS received an email cancellation submission from the customer requesting cancellation of her Service Contract coverage and requesting a refund.On May 19, 2017, CARS responded to customer via email advising that CARS could assist with the cancellation of the Service Contract; however, CARS would be unable to provide a refund, since the request was twenty (20) days after Service Contract acceptance and the vehicle was not declared a total loss or repossessed by the lienholder, pursuant to the Cancellation Provisions of the customers' Service Contract.By the customers' signatures on the customers' Value Plus Service Contract, under the Acceptance to Terms, the customers acknowledged that they read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. The customers' Service Contract states Under Covered Components: "COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVE COMPONENTS." And under Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1 (a): “COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure."CARS was unable to assist with the June 10, 2016 claim because the components requiring repair were not listed for coverage pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customers' Service Contract. In addition during the processing of the April 28, 2017 and May 18, 2017 claims, CARS was willing to assist with the control arm/ball joint repair. All the other components requiring repair were not listed for coverage pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customers' Service Contract. Therefore, the cost of those repairs would be the responsibility of the customers.The customers' Service Contract is to be utilized to assist with the repair of their vehicle and does not provide “all inclusive" coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customers' 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 customers' what is specifically covered and their financial responsibility for the tear-down, diagnosis, non-covered components, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible.Also, the customers' Service Contract states at Paragraph 5 (a] & (b): "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 by CARS, less any claims paid. This Service Contract will not be reinstated after a cancellation is requested. 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."The customers are requesting a refund of $1,899.00 for the cost for the amount they paid for their Service Contract. Please note that CARS Service Contracts are sold wholesale through dealer; therefore, what the customers paid for the cost of their Service Contract is not the amount that CARS received for the cost of the same. In addition, as stated above, CARS advised the customers on two (2) occasions that they could cancel their Service Contract at any time; however, pursuant to the Cancellation Provisions of their Service Contract, they would not be eligible for any refund, since the request for cancellation exceeded the twenty (20) days after Service Contract acceptance and the vehicle was not declared a total loss or repossessed by the lienholder.If the customers' would like to continue with their Service Contract coverage and the repairs to the vehicle have not yet been performed, please have the customers' repair facility contact CARS, so that we may provide an authorization number for the claim for payment by CARS in the amount of $70.98.In addition, the customers have Service Contract Coverage through May 2, 2019. If their vehicle incurs future mechanical issues, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered. If covered, CARS will authorize and pay the claim pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of their Value Plus Service Contract.When a claim is presented, CARS promptly investigates all circumstances surrounding the claim. CARS honors every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100% to ultimately provide quality service at an affordable price to offset the cost of a covered repair.If the customers have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact my office to efficiently resolve any outstanding concerns they may have.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.All of this could have been avoided if someone from cars would have just answered 1 of the 20+ phone calls I made to CARS. In a 5month period of time.As far as the invoice being sent to CARS? Rod should have communicated that to the service manager [redacted] while he was dealing with him. [redacted] made no mention to me about it and CARS avoided me for 5 months until I made this complaint.As far as the "Goodwill Gesture"? I will accept the pro-rate if the date begins from the day this all started September 15, 2017. I am not willing to deal with the people that sold me the car. I believe as a "Goodwill Gesture" you(CARS), should refund the entire pro-rate amount. Then you can deal with the people you had sell YOUR PRODUCT. I would also like to know the amount of the pro-rate. My calculations bring me to $1,199.25.The form you attached will not print. I have tried 3 printers and all 3 printers only print the logo at the top of the page. could you please mail the form?
Regards,
[redacted]

February 4, 2016VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITERE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 AUDI A6 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated February 1, 2016 enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On September 18, 2014, the customer...

purchased 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 September 19, 2014 (the attached "Service Contract”).On January 4, 2016 at 1:24 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from the customer's son advising that the customer’s vehicle was transmission issues. CARS reviewed transmission coverage and claim procedures pursuant to the customer's Service Contract.First Claim: On January 11, 2016 at 1:46 p.m., a repair facility contacted CARS advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On January 11, 2016 at 2:48 p.m., CARS contacted the repair facility to inquire if they performed internal transmission work. The repair facility advised that they only performed removal and replacement of transmissions. CARS then advised the repair facility that the customer would have to move her vehicle to another repair facility capable to perform tear-down to the point of component failure.On January 11, 2016 at 2:50 p.m., CARS advised the customer that the repair facility that her vehicle was at for the transmission issues with her vehicle does not perform internal transmission work. 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. We advised that she would have to move her vehicle to a repair facility that is capable of performing internal transmission work. The claim was then closed.Second Claim: On January 18, 2016 at 2:28 p.m., a repair facility contacted CARS advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing transmission issues. CARS then reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility.On January 18, 2016 at 3:15 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was towed to the repair facility on January 15, 2016. The repair facility advised that there were no leaks and the fluid was full and varnished. The repair facility further advised that check engine light was displayed along with seven (7) codes and none were transmission codes. CARS advised the repair facility to obtain the customer’s authorization to tear-down her vehicle to the point of failure to verify the cause of failure and extent of damage to her vehicle. CARS further advised that the customer was responsible for all tear-down/diagnostic charges pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of her Service Contract.On January 19, 2016 at 3:43 p.m., the customer telephoned CARS to ask what was covered under her Service Contract. CARS advised that her Service Contract covers internally lubricated parts within the transmission housing. CARS advised that without teardown to the point of failure to verify the cause of failure and extent of damage, CARS would be unable to move forward with her transmission claim.On January 25, 2016 at 10:46 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the cause of failure was that the clutch drum broke causing metal in the fluid.On January 26, 2016 at 9:31 a.m., after CARS 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 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.On February 2, 2016 at 2:26 p.m., the customer telephoned CARS to question the amount she paid for the repair of her vehicle. CARS advised that we were informed by the repair facility she would take the cash allowance to use towards the repair of choice. We advised that she had the option of having CARS supply a transmission to the repair facility for her vehicle. The customer advised that the repair facility never gave her that option. CARS advised that she would have to speak to her repair facility about not presenting her with that option.CARS will pay the repair facility in the amount of $1,503.00 via credit card upon receipt of a proper invoice.By the customer's signature on the 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 (f): "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES 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 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 customer's Service Contract states at Paragraph 3 (c) "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: A proper diagnosis shall include tear-down to the point of componentfailure, 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. CARS is not responsible for any tear-down time.The Service Contract states under Labor: "The authorized time for a repair will 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." During the claim intake calls on January 18, 2016 the repair facility advised CARS that the cost of labor was $95.00 per hour. Upon receipt of a properly submitted invoice to CARS from the repair facility, CARS will pay for 8.8 hours of labor at $60.00 per hour for the January 18, 2016 transmission claim. As stated above, the time allowed for repairs is based on Mitchell’s OnDemand Labor Guide. The customer is responsible for any amount of time over the allowed amount. CARS is not responsible for any tear-down time.The customer's Service Contract states: "RENTAL BENEFITS The Service ContractHolder will be reimbursed $25.00 for each eight hours of Mitchell OnDemand 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 ofreason, is not included." Here, as stated above the time to repair/replace the covered components was 8.8 hours. Therefore, CARS will pay the customer $25.00 toward the rental costs incurred during the repair of her vehicle.It is also states at Paragraph 1 (s): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Taxes and repair facility charges." Here, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, she is responsible for any taxes incurred with the repair of her vehicle. 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.CARS has fulfilled all of its obligations under the customer's Service Contract. The customer has Service Contract coverage on her vehicle through September 19, 2016. Should her 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 her 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.I do not agree with the businesses stand point on this claim. In no way is this coverage or protection plan in any way a good system. It will cost the consumer almost equal to what the warranty will pay if not more. For example, as I was informed by CARS, "they only have to replace the (item found to be at fault) thus this will lead to further damages. In a closed system such as a transmission replacing one at fault item will not efficintly resolve the problem, yet it will just prolong the actual issue. Resulting in failure of other stressed parts down the line. For aproximately the same amount of money I was going to pay with assistance from CARS protection plus, I managed to find a place that will not only rebuild my transmission, they will use parts that are heavy duty, surpassing the OEM quality, upgrading the components. Again, not only being unsatisfied as a customer if the Revdex.com takes a moment and reads the customer complaints against said party they may be in favor of this claim. Again, I do not accept the response from CARS protection plus. It is dismissive and a blatant disregard for customer satisfaction. Between towing and the work done thus far it has finanially caused a burden. Because as far as there towing package goes,  again it is at the cost of the contract holder out of pocket with reimburament of minimal funds. To conclude, I would like a full refund of contract cost or for CARS protection plus to pay for the alternative upgraded transmission I have being built to be put in at there mediocre low rate.  
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]

January 29, 2018
 
VIA:  Revdex.com WEBSITE
Revdex.com
of Western Pennsylvania
400
Holiday Drive, Suite 220
Pittsburgh,
PA  15220
 
RE:      2005
JEEP GRAND...

CHEROKEE
                                    VIN (Last
8):  [redacted]
                                    OUR FILE
NO.:  [redacted]
                                    Revdex.com
COMPLAINT NO.:  [redacted]
 
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
 
I am in receipt of your letter dated January
24, 2018, enclosing the customer’s consumer complaint regarding the
above-referenced vehicle.  I would like
to respond as follows: 
 
CARS has moved forward with the
mechanical claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle and considers this
matter now 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 question, please
contact my office.
 
Sincerely,
Jason ** M[redacted]
                                        ...⇄ /> Counsel
 
[redacted]
[redacted]

COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2005 FORD F250 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: C[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted] 1 am in receipt of your letter dated November 9, 2015, enclosing the above- referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On October 8, 2015, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle....

On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Onyx Service Contract (24 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on October 9, 2015 (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. Attached please find a copy of our check no. [redacted] which will be mailed to the customer's lienholder. By Mr. [redacted]' 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 by CARS, less any claims paid, by providing a written request to cancel for a full refund of the amount received by C.A.R.S.” Please note that CARS service contracts are sold wholesale to selling dealers. Therefore, what Mr. [redacted] paid for his Service Contract (i.e. $2,400.00) is not what CARS received for the cost of his Service Contract. The amount received by CARS is reflected in the copy of the attached check made out to the customer's lienholder. CARS advised 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 (see attached letter). 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]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 AUDI A4 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated December 5, 2016, enclosing the additional concerns of the customer and respond as follows:A CARS claims manager has reviewed the customer's additional concerns and also the attachments he provided. As indicated on the illustration provided by the customer, the TCM specific part numbers requiring to be repaired on the customer's vehicle are part of the TCM, which is bolted to the back of the valve body. This part is not internally lubricated in the transmission. In addition, the TCM is not listed for coverage under the customer's Service Contract. Furthermore, the repair facility that the customer chose to repair his vehicle advised CARS that the TCM is external to the valve body and can be purchased separately. Please see a copy of the illustration, which I have highlighted for further explanation and clarification of the location of the TCM.The customer is requesting that CARS have an independent inspection performed on his vehicle. Please note that if CARS would send an independent inspector to inspect the customer's vehicle, the inspection would only confirm and verily that the TCM failure on the customer's vehicle is external to the transmission, which would not alter CARS' decision regarding the status of the customer's mechanical claim.Therefore, CARS stands behind its original decision and is not able to offer any assistance with the September 13, 2016 mechanical claim, because the items requiring repair are not covered components pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.JPM/cll