Home Warranty of America

June 9, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***:*** NC-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following
response We apologize for the miscommunication between the customer and our office, when she called in three separate claims on June 4, 2016, on multiple failures that occurred in her home while she was on vacation We are processing her cancellation request. Sincerely, *** *** DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

January 30, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: *** : *** VA-*** Dear Ms***: We have reviewed the customer’s complaint, and have arranged a service
call, to get the diagnosis needed to move forward with the claim Sincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: you absolutely are responsible for fixing the issue as it is part of what is covered under the home warranty contract that was purchasedYou are liable to find a company who can fix whatever went wrong with the replacement stove top that your company orderd on our behalfI don't understand why it's so hard to diagnose the issue and correct itDo you employ any contractors who know what they are doing or are they all hacks like HWA? Own up to your policies and procedures and act like a real company who is out to truly help its customersI am not the only one with a complaint about how your company does not do its jobHow would you feel if you were in the customers shoes and you had been thrown around for months? Have a conscience
Sincerely,
Erin ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: The broken parts can be replacedThe warranty company refuses to do soThey are making me accept a buy out that will not cover the parts or making me pay $because they will only give me an inside unit and will HAVE to buy the outside unitI am only asking for either the parts to be changed or at least enough to money to cover the cost of the partsThe inside and outside systems are systemcan not work with the other so if they make me change the inside they should pay for the outside
Sincerely,
*** ***

October 10, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** WA-*** Dear Ms***: We received the
customer’s complaint and would like to respond accordingly. On September 20, 2016, at 6:PM CST, the customer’s tenant contracted us, reporting that the freezer was defrosting as of the prior day. Per contract section III.C: “In emergency situations HWA will determine what repairs constitute an emergency and will make reasonable efforts to expedite emergency Service (emergency usually considered to be loss of life or peril).” We immediately assigned the claim to a local technician, and when they did not respond, we reassigned the claim to another company That company scheduled a service, repaired the refrigerator, and when the initial repair did not hole, approved a second repairPer contract section VI.B: “Problems cannot always be diagnosed and repaired on the first service visitHWA is not liable for losses or damages resulting from misdiagnosis or delays in completing diagnosis or repairs.” Per the customer’s demand, we have approved the repair(but the inability to use a refrigerator does not cause loss of life or peril), we will not refund their trade fee as compensation, and the cancellation will be addressed per contract if/when the customer decides to cancel the contract Sincerely, *** *** Claims Special Handling

December 4, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** FL-*** Dear Ms***: We received the customer’s inquiry and provide the
following response On the evening of Tuesday, November 21, (6:PM EST), the following microwave claim was filed online: Covered Item Problem: Not Heating Brand: ** Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: Today Q & A: Q: Please Tell Us What Type of Microwave You Have A: BuiQ: Please tell us how many times this item has worked properly since the contract start date A: More Than Five Times Problem Description: ** Spacemaker Microwave installed over the stoveMicrowave was being used, then power shut off after removing heated itemAfter minutes, messa** came across screen stating to set clockSet clock, all looked ok, but now microwave will not heat, and it shows it is on level This is the first time this has happened** Spacemaker Microwave Model# *** Serial# GL *** B Per our agreement, we immediately assigned a technician to address the reported failure, expecting them to contact the customer in a reasonable amount of time to schedule service. At 10:PM, the customer called our office to confirm that the technician is an appliance company. We assured the customer that they are (which we can and do confirm, per the information provided to our office) On Friday, November 24, 2017(the day after Thanksgiving), at approximately 1:PM, we called the technician at the customer’s request, to confirm they would service and left a messa** Saturday evening (8:PM CST), the customer requested a supervisor call, because they had not heard from the technician. The representative took the customer’s information, but could not guarantee a supervisor call on a Sunday Monday, the customer filed this complaint and cancelled their contract. We apologize for the delay in vendor response on the week of Thanksgiving, as well as the lack of a weekend response on the escalation of the issueWe accepted the customer’s request to cancel the covera**, and as they pay monthly for their contract, there would be no pro-rata refund for the remaining term(Contract reference Section VIII.E) Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President

June 24, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** MN-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s complaint, and spoken to them
directly in reference to their HVAC issue Sincerely, *** *** DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

November 11, 2015*** ***Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.comNorth Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL 60611*** *** *** *** *** ***We have received the
customer’s complaint and
our providing the following response.On September 22, 2015, the
customer opened a Warranty Contract with our company.On the afternoon of October 5,
2015, the customer called our office to file a few claims on certain items that
he had stated had never worked properly for him since he had moved in on
September 25, (To be specific, the customer stated he noticed the water softener
issue right after they moved into the home, when he tried to set it up. He then went on to discuss his reverse
osmosis filtration system that is not eligible.
When he was asked if the water softener ever worked, his response was “Never.”
)Per our Contract, we assigned
a technician to diagnose the unit, but we had difficulty assigning a technician
that would service the customer’s area.
As a courtesy, we offered them the option of finding their own
technician, but when they could not, we assigned a technician. The technician advised that the unit had
failed due to age. Per our contract,
section I.B.7:““Covered Systems and
Components” means systems and components as specifically described herein as
“Included” and that are located inside the confines of the main foundation of
the Covered Property and are in proper working order on the Coverage Period
Start Date and become inoperative due to wear and tear, including breakdowns
due to insufficient maintenance if at the time the issue or breakdown was
unknownComponents shall be considered in proper working order if no defect is
known or would have been detectable by a visual inspection or mechanical test
on the Coverage Period Start Date.”As the customer stated it had
never run properly for a single day, and the technician determined that the
issue had failed due to age, we requested the customer’s home inspection, to
determine “ if no defect is known or
would have been detectable by a visual inspection or mechanical test on the
Coverage Period Start Date.”Per the inspection, the
inspector is not required to:“Inspect water conditioning
such as water softeners or water drain pumps of waste ejector pumps.“Had the softener been
visually inspected or mechanically tested on the Coverage Period Start Date, a
problem would have been detected, as it was by the technician when they
inspected the unit As a courtesy to the customer,
we have refunded the trade service fee, but we would not repair/replace the
softener, that never worked properly for the customer, and was not determined
to be in proper working order.Sincerely,*** ***Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: A verbal apology does not rectify the fact that it took more than days, 20+ phone calls initiated by me, multiple emails, and many sleepless nights for my pregnant wife and month old son before HWA finally ordered the necessary partAt this time the repair still has not been completed.
Sincerely,
*** ***

December 8, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** OH-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following
response On both November 14, and November 18, 2016, we were advised that the technician is recommending replacement, because the information tag is missing from the unit Though the unit can still be identified and possibly repaired, we have offered the customer multiple options to resolve the failure. Per our contract section VII.I: “HWA has the sole right to determine whether a covered appliance, system or component will be repaired or replaced.” If a unit can be repaired or replaced, it is our optionWe are waiting for his response to our last offer, or contact from his representation Sincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

November 1, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** MO-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s inquiry, and the issue was
corrected with the customer this morning Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President

June 28, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** TX-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s complaint, and have reached out to the customer
directly to review their issue We are waiting for their response Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President

April 27, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** NH-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the cost breakdown from the customer, and approved said breakdown. We are just waiting for their invoice, to provide the discussed reimbursement Sincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

January 31, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: *** : *** LA-*** Dear Ms***: We have reviewed the customer’s complaint, and have spoken to the customer
to address the issue. Sincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

September 15, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** NC-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s inquiry, and are sorry that
the initial repair did not address the failure. We were looking to further address the repair of the machine, but to expedite the completion of the issue, we have contacted the customer with options as of September14, 2017. We await their direct response Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President

March 7, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** TX-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s rebuttal and are providing the following responseSo, rather than provide support for her position, in the form of documentation from the HVAC technician she claims to have hired, the customer demands a $5,100, over six months after the initial incidentPlease note, in July, when we advised the customer of the diagnosis we received, and explained how that is not eligible under the Contract, she abruptly ended the call. She did not call us back stating that a second opinion came out and that she has a different diagnosisShe just replaced the equipment with a technician that we did not approvePer contract section III.D: “HWA has the sole and absolute right to select the Authorized Repair Technician to perform the Service; and HWA will not reimburse for Services performed without its prior approval.” As to the water hearer, her technician’s invoice does not address a cause of failure on her unit, but indicates that it was too small for her two bath homeShe replaced her unit with a gallon tankSo, as to her demand, we will not reimburse the customer for the non covered issues, nor will we reimburse for work done without our prior approvalSincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

February 11, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** IL-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s
complaint and a supervisor has addressed the issue with the customer directlySincerely, *** *** Escalated Special Handling

August 8, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** KY-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s complaint, and addressed the
issue with them directly Sincerely, *** *** DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 24, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: ***: *** TX-*** Dear Ms***: We received the customer’s inquiry, and the refund was processed June 10,
Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President

August 24, *** *** Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com North Wabash, Suite 2006 Chicago, IL Re: 12342053: Parker MS-*** Dear Ms***: We have received the customer’s inquiry, and provide the
following response. The customer is referencing our stand alone appliance coverage, which states: “HWA will pay no more than $ 1,in the aggregate during the Contract Period for repair or replacement on Stand Alone Ice Maker or Stand Alone Freezer.” On May 25, 2017, the customer reported a long standing problem with their Icemaker On June 14, 2017, the technician reported a leak in the customer’s system, and quoted a cost of $(less the customer’s $service fee)=$130, to detect the leak. On June 21, 2017, the technician stated that they found the failure, but they did not recommend repairing the unit, favoring replacement On July 6, 2017, we contacted the technician , to confirm the specific failure On July 7, 2017, the technician confirmed a compressor failure, and would call back with pricing On July 10, 2017, we figured out a cash out amount on the repair, based on the stated failure and our quoted cost on the repair, in the amount of $ (Per contract section VII.O: “HWA reserves the right to offer cash back in lieu of repair or replacement in the amount of HWA ’s actual cost, which may be less than retail, to repair or replace any covered system, component or appliance.”) On July 13, 2017, the technician refused to perform the repairs to the unit, and confirmed the $offer as valid On July 14, 2017, we offered the $to the customer On July 17, 2017, the customer advised she wanted repair or replacement. The technician refused the repair, and the warranty would not replace a repairable unit. (The technician had already taken a portion of the customer’s cap ($130) with the initial diagnosis and leak chedid not wish to spend more on a second opinion) On July 18, 2017, the customer accepted the $cash out, then called back claiming that we were ‘low balling’ the offer. We called the technician and confirmed our costs, and the technician advised that there may have been additional problems which developed after the repair, but he had no way of knowing if this was the case or not Over the next three weeks there were intermittent calls/emails between our office and the customer, where we advised that we were offering our cost on the diagnosed failure, and the customer was trying to get all of our responses in writing, per the directive of her attorney On August 8, 2017, we offered the customer the remaining $of their Ice maker cap. We also verified that the customer did accept our cash out. The customer’s contract has since expired. They are now demanding call recordings which we are under no obligation to provide, and making libelous accusations, which are completely untrue. The customer has received a check for $820, and will receive an additional check for $50, to provide the remaining contract cap for their standalone ice maker We are sorry for the complicated resolution, but this is all we are doing to address the issue Sincerely, *** *** Office of the President