Home Warranty of America

August 10, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AZ- [redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and per our...

contract, section VII.H:   “HWA has the sole right to determine whether a covered appliance, system or component will be repaired or replaced.”   The customer processing complaints of this nature, about the technicians that are sent or our company, will in no way alter their diagnosis provided, or our decisions based on that diagnosis.   Per the technician sent, the customer’s unit has been repaired.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 22, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]  KY-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have...

received the customer’s complaint, and addressed the issue with the customer directly.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 8, 2016 [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006   Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: [redacted] OK [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: The install was completed on August 6, 2016. Sincerely, [redacted]DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 9, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and have refunded the...

contract cost for the current contract, that they [redacted]led.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

February 21, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] ID-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have processed the customer’s refund.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

July 26, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received the customer’s inquiry, and have contacted him to discuss the...

resolution of the claim.  We are waiting for his return call.   Sincerely,     Carl [redacted] Office of the President

August 8, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] FL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and provide the...

following response.   On June 14, 2017, the customer opened a claim for the AC system in their rental property.  Per our contractual agreement, we sent a technician to diagnose the reported failure (water leak in their garage from unit).   On June 19, 2017, the technician advised that coil was %100 clogged, causing the water to leak.   Per contract section VII.F:   “HWA is not responsible for consequential or secondary damage. This includes but is not limited to, repair of conditions caused by chemical or sedimentary build up…”   And section VII.L:   “HWA is not liable for normal or routine maintenance.”   We advised the customer, and he disagreed with the technician’s diagnosis, and demanded that his contract be cancelled.   The supervisor call that he requested was made two days later, to his tenant, and then a message was left for the customer.   We are sorry that the customer disagreed with the technician’s diagnosis, and cancelled his coverage.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

September 29, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] MD-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received...

the customer’s complaint, and have contacted them to address the completion of the installation.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 5, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AZ-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received...

the former customer’s complaint, and provide the following response.   On June 16, 2016, they opened a warranty contract with our company at a cost of $745.00.   They then filed 3 different claims, and had concerns with the technician’s that serviced his AC and pool.   They are requesting a full contract refund of $745.00, and 75.00 for the trade fee paid for pool service-total $820.00. They have received $630.38 as a refund, and are looking for the remaining funds paid for the contract and a trade service fee.   Per our contract, section VIII.E:      “Arizona Residents: If this Contract is canceled, You shall be entitled to a prorata refund of the paid contract fee for the unexpired term.”   And section III.E:   “You will pay the Trade Call Fee or the actual cost of the Services covered under this Contract, whichever is less. The Trade Call Fee is for each visit by an Authorized Repair Technician, except as noted below, and is payable to the Authorized Repair Technician at the time of each visit.”   So, the $189.62 the  former customer is demanding, is the earned funds for the first two months the contract was in effect ($57.31 * 2), and the trade fee that was paid for services to his pool.     We decline the former customer’s demand, and consider this issue closed.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 2, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received the customer’s complaint, and are tracking down the...

diagnosis of the AC failure, to move forward with the issue.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

November 11, 2015Lucille [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611Re: [redacted] Lowe  GA-[redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:We have received the
customer’s complaint and our...

providing the following response.On April 1, 2015, the
customer opened a Warranty Contract with our company.On the morning of October 16,
2015, he opened the following heating claim online:“Covered Item Problem: Gas
Furnace - usually located in a basement, attic, or closet When did you first notice the
problem?: Two Weeks Ago Q & A: Q: Has the Heating System
Ever Worked Properly A: Yes Q: Please Tell Us The Nature
Of The Problem You Are Experiencing A: Will Not Come On Q: Have you had maintenance
performed on the system A: Yes Q: How many heating units do
you have A: Two Q: Please tell us which part
of the home is not heating A: Upstairs Q: Please tell us how long
the unit has been running properly for this season. A: 1 Day Problem Description: The unit
also leaks and the circuit board has rust all over it. I had a licensed HVAC
tech come out and do routine maintenance on it and he Suggestions that I need
to replace this unit.Per our Contract, we sent a technician
out to diagnose the unit. Per their diagnosis, the 10 year old furnace is
rusted out, and  completely
destroyed.  He advised that it looks like
 water has been running into and through
the unit for an extended period of time, staining the entire unit, including
the control board, with rust.  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 normal wear and tear, including breakdowns
due to insufficient maintenance if at the time the issue or breakdown was
unknown. Components 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
only run properly for a single day, and the technician determined that the
issue had been going on for an extended period of time, 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 technician’s inspection
of the furnace from February 16, 2015, he coded the unit as:“Poses a risk of injury or death”“Recommend repairing or replacing”“Recommend evaluation by a specialist”He stated the following in reference
to the system:Recommended and inspection of the heat exchanger, and a Carbon
Monoxide testRecommended duct cleaning due to significant amounts of debrisHe noted damage to the AC drain pain, and stated a technician
should repair and evaluate as necessary. And provided pictures of:The inner unit covered in rust and debris.The floor below the unit stained with rust from the unit itselfThe outside paneling of the home stained by rust from the unit.Per the inspection,  the unit had been previously damaged by water
leaking from the broken drain pan and through the unit prior to purchase. Without
support that the issue that was noticed by the inspector was addressed and the
unit was in proper working order as of the Coverage Period Start Date, the failure
with the furnace would not be addressed under the Contract.Thus, we decline to reimburse
the customer for his replacement furnace, as it was not in proper working order
on the Coverage Period Start Date, and it did not become inoperative due to
normal wear and tear. Sincerely,Carl [redacted]Escalated Special Handling

June 24, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] OK-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and spoken to them...

directly in reference to their HVAC issue.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 26, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have addressed the issue with the customer, and the dates referenced in our prior letter are factual.    The contract was opened  May 18, 2017, and the failure was initially reported June 7, 2017.  This is 20 days, and not 45. The payment discussed with our office is being provided, and we consider this matter closed.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 2, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  [redacted] NJ- [redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and are providing...

the following response.   On the evening of April 22, 2015, the customer filed the following claim online:   “Covered Item Problem: Outdoor Motor Is Not Coming On Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: Yesterday Q & A: Q: Please tell us what type of pool you have A: Above Ground Problem Description: We opened the pool cover and all to prepare for the season and went to power on the motor, but it is not coming on - need assistance with someone to diagnose and repair”    On the morning of April 23, 2015, we, per contract, assigned a technician to diagnose the failure.   On June 13, 2015, the customer e-mailed us for a status update.  As we never heard anything from the technician, we immediately called them to find out the diagnosis.   On June 16, 2015, we called the vendor again, and the information we had for the vendor was no longer accurate.  As a courtesy, we offered the customer the option to get their own technician, requiring that the technician call us with a diagnosis before doing any work, and that we would provide reimbursement based on our costs.  We also stated we would look for a second technician as well, to attempt to expedite the repair.   On July 8, 2015, we found a technician that would work with the customer specifically, abut less than a week later we were advised by the Home owner, that they could not.   On July 26, 2015, the customer provided us an e-mail with a partial quote, and then e-mailed  that they were getting further information from other technicians and would contact us back.   On January 14, 2016, the customer called back, stating nothing was done the prior year.   On April 7, 2016, The customer requested we reopen the claim, and requested we assign a technician to diagnose.   The following day, we assigned a technician to provide diagnosis of the issue.   On April 9, 2016, we confirmed with the customer that the technician could address the issue.   On May 5, 2016, the technician contacted us, and advised of a series of needed repairs, that would go beyond the customer’s Pool cap of $1000.00.   A week later, on May 12, 2016, the customer advised that the technician had not yet gone to the customer’s home.  We called the technician, who advised that they had been speaking a great deal to the customer.  We told the technician that they needed to go to the property to diagnose the issue.   On May 22, 2016,  the customer advised the technician ad not yet come out.  We offered a new technician, but the customer wanted to get the technician to the property.   On May 27, 2016, we were advised that the technician could not come, an reassigned the claim.   On June 6, 2016, we again offered the customer their own technician, with the previously referenced requirements.   On June 22, 2016, the customer asked for the prior technician to come out.   On June 27, 2016, the technician tried to use pictures to diagnose the failure. We called him to confirm his diagnosis, but could not contact.   On June 28, 2016, the customer advised that he had received multiple diagnoses and multiple quotes, and wanted a cashout based on those quotes.   On July 1, 2016, the customer wanted the contract cap.   On July 2, 2016, we called the customer, and advised that we could move forward if a technician called us with a diagnosis and  had been to his home to examine his pool. We could not approve a diagnosis from a technician that had not been to the home and diagnosed the failure.   On July 8, 2016, we again advised the customer of the procedure to get his own technician..   On July 15, 2016, his technician called in and advised that rodents had been eating the wiring to the control board, and all the inside components.   There was a dead rodent on the board itself.   Per contract, the warranty specifically excludes control boards, and any failure not caused by normal wear.   The customer is requesting one of two items:   The pool cap, based on their belief that the issue would be covered.  Without a valid diagnosis from a licensed technician, we cannot determine if an issue is covered or not under the contract. Since this issue is not a normal wear and tear failure, it would not be covered and we would not provide them the $1,000.00 cap.   A refund of the contract coverage, from April 22, 2015.   The warranty has provided coverage for this time period, addressing multiple claims. We will not refund coverage that was used.     The customer has requested to cancel their contract, which is in process.     Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

February 28, 2018     Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IN-974246     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   As stated in the letter, the refund will be provided to the customer in 10 business days.    We are sorry the customer has inconvenienced his bank, but the funds have already been returned as requested.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

January 31, 2018     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] SC-[redacted]     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry and are...

sorry for any delay in the completion of the issue.    We have contacted the customer directly and are waiting for a diagnosis from a second opinion, as the initial technician would not address the failure.   Sincerely,   [redacted] Office of the President

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
I wish to cancel the contract with HWA and have them refund the prorated amount I am due per the contract.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

March 21, 2018     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AZ-[redacted]     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry and have...

addressed their concerns with them directly.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

September 12, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Per the last diagnosis received, the heater was removed from the pools plumbing, and is no longer part of the system. The failure cannot be diagnosed.   The amount offered is our quoted cost on repair, which was provided by the last technician to diagnose the unit, when it was leaking.     If the pool heater never worked properly, it is not eligible under contract.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:My technicians, not hired by the home warranty company, said that neither incident was caused by a power surge.
Sincerely,
[redacted]