Fox Concrete

PROTECTION PLUSOctober 7, 2016VIA: Revdex.com WEBSITE[redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2004 MITSUBISHI OUTLANDER VIN (Last 8)[redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]I am in receipt of your letter dated September 30,...

2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows: On August 24, 2016, 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 August 29, 2016 (the attached "Service Contract"]. The customer's Service Contract will expire on November 29,2016.After reviewing the customer's consumer complaint, in an effort to amicably resolve this matter, CARS will issue the customer a check for $100.00 which is the amount she paid for 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.Sincerely,JPM/jmm

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

June 2, 2015 VIA:    EMAIL/Revdex.com WEBSITE RE:      COMPLAINT ID #[redacted] 2003 VOLKSWAGEN BEETLE VIN (Last 8[redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]:    I am in receipt of your letter dated June 2, 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 January 10, 2014. On that same date she also applied for a CARS Value Limited Service Contract (36 Months/45,000 Miles] and the same was received with payment and approved by CARS on January 15, 2014 (See attached Service Contract).    First Claim:      On April 25, 2014, at 9:05 a.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing air conditioning compressor and secondary air flow pump issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.    On April 25, 2014, at 9:22 a.m., CARS advised the repair facility that these were non- covered components under the customer's Service Contract and CARS would not be able to assist with the repair of the vehicle. We then closed the claim.    Second Claim: On May 19, 2014, at 1:14 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing water pump issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.    On May 19, 2014, at 1:32 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim as follows: We could supply the water pump for $55.22. [redacted] labor guide stated the total repair should take 3.4 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays $50.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $170.00. 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 $125.22, and we could supply the parts as stated above and pay $70.00 towards labor or pay $125.22 towards the repair of the customer's choice. The customer chose to take the cash allowance to use toward the repair of her choice.   The attached invoice was submitted to CARS by the repair facility for payment on June 2, 2015. As shown on the invoice, the repair facility invoiced CARS in the amount of $82.08 for our portion of the repairs to the customer's vehicle. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the service contract, on June 3, 2014, CARS paid the repair facility a total of $82.08 via check. The claim was then closed.    However, after CARS review of this invoice, CARS is willing to pay the customer an additional $43.13, which represents the difference between what CARS authorized and the amount we were invoiced for the repairs made on behalf of the customer's vehicle. A check in the amount of $43.13 will be mailed directly to the customer.    Third Claim: On April 29, 2015, at 3:54 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing driver and passenger window regulator and window motor issues. The repair facility further advised that the customer's door module needed to be coded. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.    On April 29, 2015, at 4:28 p.m., CARS advised the repair facility that these were non- covered components under the customer's Service Contract and CARS would not be able to assist with the repair of the vehicle. We then closed the claim.    By the customer’s signature on her Value Limited 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 ABOVE COMPONENTS." and under Term and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a):                    "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure." The driver and passenger window regulators and window motors are not listed for coverage under the customer’s Service Contract; therefore, they are the responsibility of the customer to repair.    Under the customer's Service Contract, we were not required to cover the full cost of the repair. Said service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components; therefore, it was not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the customer what components are specifically covered and the customer’s financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, and taxes.    CARS stands by its decision and is unable to assist with the April 29, 2015 claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicle pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.    We would like to point out here that the Form number B1003 [redacted] is not the Service Contract form number for the Service Contract submitted by the selling dealer to CARS. The selling dealer submitted a Value Limited Service Contract and CARS approved a Value Limited Service Contract with payment on January 15, 2014.   The customer has service contract coverage through January 15, 2017 or when the odometer registers 145,558 miles, whichever occurs first. If a claim is opened CARS will process 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 her Value Limited 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.                                                                      Sincerely,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       [redacted]                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            General Counsel

VIA: EMAIL/WEBSITE[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 14, 2016, and respond as follows: Pursuant to the customer's request, CARS had an independent inspection performed on the customer's vehicle. The inspection occurred on December 14, 2016. The independent inspector found that the TCM was located in the transmission pan. The connector is part of the unit and comes out of the rear cover. The shop presented to the inspector a documented Code P0722, which was the output speed shaft sensor circuit. The shop also performed a diagnostic of the TCM and determined the unit was faulty. The TCM was already removed from the transmission during the inspection and the inspector could not verify the fault code with the battery being disconnected. The TCM could not be tested due to disassembly. The independent inspector opined that in order to access the TCM it was not necessary to disassemble the transmission, the transmission pan just needed to be removed. The inspector verified that the TCM in the customer's vehicle was located inside of the transmission pan and not inside the transmission housing. The inspector was not able to verify the TCM being faulty due to not being installed in the vehicle. Attached please find photographs verifying that the transmission was not disassembled or removed from the vehicle and also verifying that the TCM is separate from the transmission housing and not an internally lubricated component inside the transmission.To reiterate, the customer's Service Contract states at: "COVERED COMPONENTS (Transmission): Lubricated parts contained within the transmission or transfer case housing; torques converter; bands; pump; pump housing; carrier assembly; planetary gears; chain; drums; ..." Additionally the customer's service contract states: COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVE COMPONENTS." Furthermore, under the Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure."The customer's Service Contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the customer's Service Contract inform him what components are specifically covered and his financial responsibility for the tear-down, diagnosis charges, filters, difference in labor rate, labor time, shop supplies, programming, non-covered components, maintenance items and taxes.As you can see from the independent inspector's findings, the TCM is not an internally lubricated part of the transmission. In addition as stated in my original letter, the repair facility chosen by the customer to repair his vehicle advised CARS that the TCM is a separate unit and can be purchased separately.For all the reasons stated above, CARS stands behind its original decision and is not able to offer any assistance with the September 13, 2016 mechanical claim, because the TCM requiring repair is not an internally lubricated part of the transmission and is not covered component pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract.At this time, CARS is requesting that the Revdex.com mark this complaint as answered. Should you have any further questions, please contact my office. Thank you.Sincerely,

July 17, 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 July 12, 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

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.

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.
This company states that they are willing to assist with any components covered under my extended warranty; however, this is a false statement. Per  a representative at CARS, my vehicle has to be completely out of commission in order for any reparis to be done. CARS is a fraudulent company, they do nothing to assist warranty buyers, they're in business of their own business and not helping the consumer. I called this  merchant several times with my complaint and am not satisfied with the resolve and I am not willing to change the status of this claim until it's been resolved. I understand the "20day cancellation policy", but this merchant should be willing to  compensate at  least a partial refund to it's unsatisfied consumers. This company has had over 50 negative complaints and at this rate, they'll have 50 more.  For a CARS rep to tell me that they'll assist only in the total amount of 14.00 or so is a slap in the face.For CARS to decline the payment of labor because according to their labor manual certain work takes a specified time when they have never worked on car the first is Ludacris. Their response to this matter is unacceptable. And I will submit complaints until this issue is resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that although they(CARS warranty)  consider this matter closed, I am still waiting for my car to be repaired . It is currently sitting at [redacted] in Roanoke Virginia  where it has been since Jan.23,2018. As I had to leave it there until the parts were shipped there. As of Friday, Feb. 2,2018 the parts have not arrived. I am still without a vehicle and this process has been long and frustrating.I will be satisfied with the efforts of CARS once they have completed my repairs at [redacted] and can finally have my vehicle back, but I thank you for attempting to move forward with the repairs  and payment of  labor costs  as promised.! 
Regards,
[redacted]

August 1, 2016VIA: SUBMITTED TO Revdex.com WEBSITEPatricia [redacted]Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2006 MERCEDES CLK350 VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated July 25, 2016, enclosing...

the above-referenced consumer complaint. I would like to respond in the following manner: On August 18, 2015 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 August 25, 2015 (the attached "Service Contract").First Claim: On July 6, 2016 at 11:12 a.m., a repair facility advised CARS that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing thrust arm, sway bar link and lower control arm issues. CARS then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On July 6, 2016 at 11:21 a.m., CARS reviewed our claim procedures with the repair facility. The repair facility advised CARS that the thrust arm bushing, ball joints that attach to the thrust arms, both lower arm bushings and sway bars links had failed. CARS advised the repair facility to fax CARS an estimate with part numbers and we would call him back after the estimate was reviewed.On July 11, 2016 at 8:45 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the customer removed the vehicle without any repairs being performed. Since the vehicle was removed, the claim was closed.Second Claim: On July 13, 2016 at 1:32 p.m., a new repair facility advised CARS that the customer's vehicle was experiencing thrust arm/bushing, sway bar link and lower control arm issues. CARS then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On July 13, 2016 at 1:55 p.m., the repair facility advised CARS that there was a noise under the vehicle. The repair facility advised that the front thrust arms have excessive play from the ball joints. The repair facility further advised that the front lower control arm bushings and the front sway bar had failed. CARS then went over our claim procedures.On July 14, 2016 at 11:41 a.m., CARS reviewed with the repair facility the customer’s options of having the parts shipped to the repair facility or taking cash allowance towards the repair of their choice. CARS then requested that the repair facility fax CARS an estimate with part numbers and we would call him back after the estimate was reviewed.On July 18, 2016 at 8:42 a.m., CARS telephoned the repair facility to get the status of the customer’s claim. The repair facility advised that they would telephone CARS with the part numbers and that the vehicle was still at the repair facility.On July 20, 2016 at 2:03 p.m., CARS left a voice message for the customer to telephone CARS.On July 21, 2016 at 10:31 a.m., CARS returned he customer's voice message giving CARS permission to speak to her friend and spoke to the customer's friend who advised that Ms. Walton's vehicle was no longer at the repair facility. CARS explained the procedures for opening a new claim.As of today, August 1, 2016, a new claim has not been opened on behalf of the customer's vehicle.By the customer’s signature on her Service Contract, she acknowledged that she read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions contained therein. It is stated in your Service Contract under: "SERVICE CONTRACT CLAIM PROCEDURES: The repair facility must provide CARS with an estimate and obtain an authorization number before any repairs are begun." Here, CARS requested an estimate with the part numbers for failed the thrust arms/bushings, sway bar link and lower control arms to your vehicle so that we would be able to determine what replacement parts/assemblies are covered under the customer's Service Contract. After CARS receives and reviews this information, we will advise the repair facility/the customer on the options we have to assist the customer with the claim.Here, neither of the two repair facilities that opened claims on behalf of the customer’s vehicle supplied CARS with the requested estimate with part numbers so that we could move forward with the July 6, 2016 and July 13, 2016 claims made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle what components would be covered under the customer's Service Contract.Under the customer's Service Contract, we are not required to cover the full cost of the repair. The 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 components are specifically 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 an estimate listing the requested part numbers before CARS can move forward with the mechanical issues the customer’s vehicle is experiencing.The customer has Service Contract coverage through August 19, 2019. 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.JPM/jmm

November 28, 2016VIA: 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 letter dated November 17, 2016, enclosing the above-...

referenced consumer complaint and respond as follows:On November 28, 2016 at 9:12 a.m., CARS telephoned the customer to advise her 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 advised the customer to submit a towing invoice for her vehicle and CARS would reimburse her up to $100.00 towards the cost of towing.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, JPM/jmm

April 17, 2018   VIA:  Revdex.com WEBSITE [redacted] Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Suite 220 Pittsburgh, PA  15220              RE:      2016 JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE     ...

                                    VIN (Last 8):  [redacted]                                     OUR FILE NO.:  [redacted]                                     Revdex.com COMPLAINT NO.:  [redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   CARS is in receipt of your letter dated April 11, 2018, enclosing the customer’s consumer complaint for the above-referenced vehicle and respond as follows:  CARS’ records indicate that on April 3, 2018, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same day, the customer also applied for a Value Plus Service Contract (12 Months/Unlimited Miles).  CARS received with payment and approved the customer’s Value Plus Service Contract on April 9, 2018. (See attached Service Contract).   On April 11, 2018 at 9:57 a.m., a repair facility opened a mechanical claim on behalf of the customer’s vehicle, advising CARS that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing water pump, hoses and thermostat issues.   On April 11, 2018 at 11:21 a.m., the customer verified with CARS that the vehicle purchase date was April 3, 2018.  During that telephone call, the customer also advised CARS that he took the vehicle to the repair facility for a fluid leak.  The customer additionally advised CARS that he noticed the leak on either April 5, 2018 or April 6, 2018.    On April 11, 2018 at 11:32 a.m., the repair facility advised CARS that the water pump was leaking.  The repair facility also recommended that the thermostat, serpentine belt and hoses be replaced, since the hoses were soft and the belt had coolant on it.  CARS advised the repair facility that the claim would need to be reviewed by management and CARS would call the repair facility back.   For all incoming calls, CARS notifies callers that phone calls may be recorded. On April 11, 2018, at 1:06 p.m., CARS management reviewed the recorded telephone call between the customer and CARS claims adjuster.  During this telephone call, the customer advised CARS that the failures with his vehicle occurred on either April 5, 2018 or April 6, 2018, which was prior to CARS’ approval with payment of the customer’s Service Contract on April 9, 2018.   On April 11, 2018 at 1:35 p.m., CARS advised the repair facility that CARS would be unable to assist with the April 11, 2018 mechanical claim made on behalf of the customer’s vehicle because the failures were present on either April 5, 2018 or April 6, 2018, which was prior to CARS’ approval with payment of the customer’s Service Contract on April 9, 2018.   By the customer’s signature on his Service Contract application, he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to its Terms and Conditions.  Directly above the customer’s signature under Acceptance to Terms, it states:  “I have read, understand, and agree to the Covered Components and Terms and Conditions as stated on this entire Service Contract application. This Service Contract application does NOT go into effect until: (1) this completed application is received by CARS, (2) with proper payment, and (3) approved by CARS, which MAY BE DIFFERENT than My date of vehicle purchase.” Additionally, the Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(b) states: “COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED:  Component failures occurring before the date CARS receives and approves this Service Contract application are not covered.”   Here, as stated previously, on April 11, 2018, the customer advised CARS that his vehicle began to experience mechanical issues on either April 5, 2018 or April 6, 2018, which was prior to CARS’ approval with payment of the customer’s Service Contract on April 9, 2018.   CARS was not aware of any mechanical issues with the customer’s vehicle when CARS approved his Service Contract application on April 9, 2018. CARS does not accept service contract applications if CARS is made aware of mechanical failures prior to CARS receiving and approving the service contract application with payment.  If CARS had been made aware that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues on either April 5, 2018 or April 6, 2018, which prior to CARS’ acceptance of his Service Contract with payment on April 9, 2018, CARS would have rejected and sent back the customer’s Service Contract application with payment to the selling dealership.  CARS would have then required that proof of repair of the current mechanical issues be provided for future possible Service Contract approval by CARS.   When processing claims, 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.  As stated in the above paragraphs, the customer’s vehicle is not eligible for assistance with any failures that were present prior to CARS’ acceptance of his Service Contract on April 9, 2018.   In addition, CARS relies that customers’ vehicles are in good working condition when a Service Contract application is submitted for coverage through CARS.  Furthermore, CARS service contracts are to be utilized for mechanical failures that occur during the coverage term and are not for mechanical failures that occur or are present prior to the Service Contract being submitted with payment, processed and approved by CARS.    For the reasons stated above, CARS is unable to assist with the repair of the customer’s vehicle.  However, the customer’s vehicle has Service Contract coverage through April 9, 2019. Should the customer’s vehicle incur future mechanical problems, CARS will process the claim to determine if the failed component is covered under his 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, CARS promptly investigates all circumstances surrounding the claim.  CARS honors every contract sold and stands behind CARS’ product 100% to ultimately provide quality service at an affordable price to offset the cost of a covered repair.  If you have any further questions, please contact CARS.   Sincerely,   Jason ** M[redacted] General Counsel   JPM/cll Attachment   Tell us why here...

RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2008 BMW 135i VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:I am in receipt of your letter dated February 29, 2016, enclosing the above-referenced consumer complaint. 1 would like to respond in the following manner: On or around June 16, 2014, the customer...

purchased the above-referenced vehicle. On that same date, the customer also applied for a CARS Ultimate Plus Service Contract (24 Months/Unlimited Miles) and the same was accepted with payment by CARS on July 2, 2014 (the attached "Service Contract”).Since the inception of the customer’s Service Contract, two (2) mechanical claims were called in by repair facilities on behalf of the customer’s vehicle as follows:First Claim: On July 8, 2015 at 1:29 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues, specifically the left door latch and the left window regulator. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On that same date, July 8, 2015 at 1:40 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the starter for $125.00. Mitchell OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair, including tear-down, should take 2.2 hours to complete and the repair facility labor rate was $85.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $187.00. We explained that the total value of the claim was $312.00, and we could supply the part as stated above and pay $187.00 towards labor or pay $312.00 towards the repair of the customer's choice. The repair facility advised CARS that the cash allowance would be used towards the repair of the customer's vehicle.On July 24, 2015 CARS paid the repair facility in the amount of $312.00 via credit card pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract. The claim was then closed.Second Claim: On February 25, 2016 at 1:59 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer’s vehicle was experiencing mechanical issues, specifically the rear turbo charger issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On February 26, 2016 at 1:26 p.m., CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the turbo charger for $250.00 and gaskets for $25.00. Mitchell OnDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 12.0 hours to complete, and the repair facility labor rate was $85.00 per hour for labor. CARS will also pay for 1.0 hours of diagnostics/tear- down at the repair facility's $85.00 per hour labor rate. Therefore, total labor was $1,105.00. We explained that the total value of the claim $1,380.00, and we could supply the part as stated and assist with the cost of labor in the amount of $1,105.00 or pay $1,380.00 towards the repair of the customer’s choice. The repair facility advised that they would get back to CARS with the customer's decision.On February 29, 2016 at 11:44 a.m., CARS reviewed the claim with the customer. The customer advised that he did not want a used turbo charger. CARS advised that pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS could offer a used turbo charger for the repair of the customer’s vehicle.By the customer’s signature on his Value Plus Service Contract he acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms and Conditions of his Service 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. Nowhere in our contract does it state that we must provide the customer with a new, rebuilt or remanufactured part when replacing a failed component. Here, the customer has the option of taking the cash allowance of $1,445.00 towards the repair of his choice or having CARS supply the used turbo charger and gasket.CARS would like to point out here that the turbo charger that was quoted to the customer and the repair facility did in fact have fewer miles than the turbo charger that was in the customer’s vehicle. It is very likely that the replacement turbo charger for the customer’s vehicle will have less mileage than the turbo charger in his vehicle; however, the original replacement turbo charger may no longer be available since several days have passed since we discussed this part with our supplier.At this time CARS is waiting to hear back from the repair facility regarding the customer's decision so that we may move forward with February 26, 2016 turbo charger claim.The customer has Service Contract coverage through July 2, 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 his 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 find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  Received letter today in the mail that was sent to [redacted] Auto & copy of the check. Have not heard from them on this matter as of yet. Thank you for handling this situation so promptly. 
Regards,
[redacted]

VIA: Revdex.comRE: CUST: [redacted]VEHICLE: 2008 JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE VIN (Last 8): [redacted] OUR FILE NO: [redacted] YOUR CASE NO: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]1 am in receipt of your letter dated June 16, 2016, regarding the above-referenced vehicle and respond as follows: Our records...

indicate that on June 3, 2015, the customer purchased the above-referenced vehicle from [redacted] On that same day, the customer also applied for a Value Plus service Contract (12 Months/Unlimited Miles). CARS received with payment and approved the customer’s Service Contract on July 9, 2015. (See attached Service Contract).On June 15, 2016 at 3:07 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advising that the customer's vehicle was experiencing transmission line, radiator hose and water pump issues. We then went over our claim procedures with the repair facility.On June 15, 2016, at 3:24 p.m., after again reviewing our claim procedures with the repair facility, CARS went over the amount we could authorize for the claim with the repair facility as follows: We could supply the water pump for $43.12. ProDemand labor guide stated the total repair should take 1.8 hours to complete, and the customer's Service Contract pays up to $70.00 per hour for labor. Therefore, total labor was $126.00. 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 $69.12, and we could supply the part as stated above and pay $26.00 towards labor or pay $69.12 towards the repair of the customer's choice. The customer chose to take the cash allowance to use toward the repair of her choice.Pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the Service Contract, CARS will pay the repair facility a total of $69.12 when a proper invoice is submitted to us for payment.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 option to select and/or supply used, rebuilt, oraftermarket 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 was the customer’s decision to either take the replacement part offered by CARS or the allowance towards the repair of the vehicle. Here, as stated above, the customer had the option of taking the cash allowance of $69.12 towards the repair of her choice or having CARS supply the water pump. The repair facility advised us that the customer would take the cash allowance towards the repair of her choice.It is stated in the customer’s Service Contract: "COVERED COMPONENTS:COVERAGE LIMITED TO ABOVE COMPONENTS." and under the Terms and Conditions at Paragraph 1(a): "COMPONENTS AND EXPENSES NOT COVERED: Components not listed regardless of failure.” Here, the transmission lines radiator hoses are not listed on the customer's Service Contract; therefore, these components are not covered under her Service Contract. The transmission lines and the radiator hoses and any labor associated with the replacement of these components are the responsibility of the customer.For all the reasons stated above, CARS stands behind our original decision and is unable to provide any further assistance with the ]une 15, 2016 claim made on behalf of the customer's vehicle.CARS service contracts are to be utilized to assist with the repair of customers’ vehicles and do not provide "all inclusive” coverage. Therefore, pursuant to the customer's Service Contract, CARS is not required to pay the full cost of the repairs. The service contract is limited in its duration, terms, conditions, and covered components and is not comprehensive (bumper to bumper) coverage. Various provisions of the service contract inform the customer what is specifically covered and her financial responsibility for the tear down, diagnosis charges, filters, taxes, the difference in labor rates and deductible.The customer has Service Contract coverage through July 9, 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 contract my office.Sincerely,Jason [redacted] General CounselJPM/jmm

RE: COMPLAINT ID #[redacted]2001 FORD F150VIN (Last 8): [redacted]OUR FILE NO.: [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]   I am in receipt of your letter dated July 21, 2015, enclosing the above-referenced consumercomplaint and respond as follows: According to our records the customer purchased the...

abovereferencedvehicle on June 21, 2014 and on that same date he applied for a CARS Value PlusService Contract (12 Months/Unlimited Miles). The same was accepted with payment by CARS onJune 30, 2014 (the attached "Service Contract”). The customer's Service Contract expired on June30,2015.   On June 2, 2015 at 2:46 p.m., CARS received a telephone call from a repair facility advisingthat the customer's vehicle was experiencing left door lock actuator issues.On June 2, 2015 at 3:08 p.m., in a recorded telephone call, the repair facility advised ourclaims adjustor that they could not give us the current mileage on the customer's vehicle becausethe odometer was inoperable and did not illuminate.On that same date at 4:34 p.m., our claims adjustor advised the repair facility that thecustomer's Service Contract was cancelled due to the inoperable odometer.The customer acknowledged that he read, understood and agreed to the Terms andConditions of your Power Train Service Contract. The customer's Service Contract states: "TERMSAND CONDITIONS at 2 (e): PROVISIONS OF THE SERVICE CONTRACT: An inoperativeodometer, and/or odometer display, voids the Service Contract without refund.” Here asstated above, the repair facility advised us that the customer's odometer was not working and nomileage could be displayed; therefore, CARS was correct when we were unable to offer anyassistance with the mechanical claim and cancelled the customer’s Service Contract.CARS relies on the information provided by the repair facilities, since we are unable to inspect each and every vehicle that has an open mechanical claim. Based upon the information provided by the repair facility, and pursuant to the Terms and Conditions of the customer's Service Contract, CARS was unable to offer any assistance with the customer's claim and his Service Contract is now cancelled.The customer states in his consumer complaint that his service contract is unlimited miles; therefore the inoperable odometer has no bearing. The ability to track accurate mileage on the customer’s odometer from the date of acceptance of his service contract is critical in order to ensure proper and timely maintenance for optimum vehicle performance. A functional odometer is also necessary in order to determine the length and scope of service contract coverage, as well as to determine the warranty miles for any shop supplied and/or CARS supplied parts.As stated above, the customer's Service Contract expired on June 30, 2015; therefore, his vehicle no longer has Service Contract coverage under any of CARS service contracts.When a claim is presented to our company, we fully investigate the circumstances surrounding the claim. We honor every contract that we sell and we stand behind our product 100%. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Jason [redacted] General Counsel[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is not 100%   satisfactory to me however is an acceptable compromise. 
Regards,
[redacted]

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] 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

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]