Home Warranty of America

May 8, 2017   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]r LA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]   We have received the customer’s rebuttal, and are providing the agreed upon reimbursement, having settled this issue with the customer.  We are not providing the customer documentation addressing the rejection of their claim, as we are addressing the issue with the customer.    Sincerely,     Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

January 16, 2018     Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] WI-2636550     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Based on their rebuttal, we are sorry the customer decided not to reach out to us for four months to tell us the technician did not come out to inspect their system.  (Per a review of the September 27, 2017 call, they advised that the issue was not a high priority or a major issue.)   This in no way entitles them to a full contract refund.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

June 13, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted]  TN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and provide the...

following response.   On August 28, 2015, the customer opened a 13 month contract with our company.   Less than a month later, they opened a claim on their upstairs Air conditioner.  Per our contractual agreement, we assigned a technician to diagnose the failure.   On September 28, 2015, the technician advised us of a leak from the thermal expansion valve.  We confirmed the unit was eligible for coverage, and contacted the customer to get their approval of the non-covered costs to complete the repair. At that time, the customer called their own second opinion, and wanted us to send a different technician, stating there were additional leaks.  We did so, and the technician billed us for a reversing valve, closing the issue without providing additional information.   On June 3, 2016, the customer reported that the upstairs unit was not cooling.  Per our contractual agreement, we assigned a technician to diagnose the failure.   After four days passed without an update, we sent a second opinion. That technician found the same problem with the thermal expansion valve that was reported the prior year. We spoke to the first technician, who confirmed a failure with the brazing on the reversing valve, which could have caused the other external leak.  There were no leaks on the inside unit.     We have offered to cover the refrigerant charges to address the repair of the system, but the customer has refused, stating we must replace her unit. 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.”   Unless the customer allows us to address the repair, there is nothing more that will be done in reference to this issue.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 25, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] LA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and apologize for any...

delays, in reference to the refrigerator failure.    We have received no diagnosis advising of a failure with the unit that requires replacement.  We need a diagnosis to continue with a rep[redacted] or replacement.    We have assigned a new technician, who is scheduling the customer today, and are awaiting their diagnosis.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 4, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   [redacted]  [redacted]
  Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and have...

received the diagnostics from the technician.  We contacted the customer directly to address the issue.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 22, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] GA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and are sorry that...

they are dissatisfied with the vendors who have performed repairs to their [redacted] and refrigerator.   As to the specifics of the individual issues, it would seem that on August 29, 2017, after the technician ([redacted]) reported, after an initial refrigerator repair,  that they could not remove the unit from where it was ‘wedged’ , and requested the customer provide access to their unit, the customer filed this complaint, referencing this issue, and the prior [redacted] claim (Three months after a different technician addressed the repair, they stated the technician did not connect the [redacted] hose to their unit).    Unfortunately, we do not address access of a unit that cannot be removed from its current location, and would not be able to address work outside the warranty period that has not failed.  Nor would we refund a paid trade fee on service work performed under contract.   Contract reference:   VII.C:  “HWA is not responsible for providing access to or closing access from any covered item which is concrete-encased or otherwise obstructed or inaccessible (including but not limited to beneath crawl spaces, floor coverings, systems, cabinets, etc.).”   III.F: “. If Services performed under this Contract should fail, then HWA will provide for the necessary repairs without an additional Trade Call Fee for a period of 90 days on parts and 30 days on labor.”   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

The customer had a Contract with our company, that started on March 17, 2014.   Per our Contractual Agreement provided to the customer, Section 5.C., “THIS CONTRACT IS FOR AN INITIAL ONE-YEAR TERM COMMENCING ON THE DATE SET FORTH ON YOUR COVERAGE PLAN LETTER OPPOSITE THE HEADING “CONTRACT...

PERIOD START DATE” AND ENDING ON THE DATE OPPOSITE THE HEADING “CONT RACT PERIOD END DATE”. IF YOU SELECTED A REGULAR PAYMENT OPTION AND WE ELECT TO RENEW YOUR PLAN, WE WILL NOTIFY YOU OF THE TERMS (INCLUDING ANY INCREASE TO THE PRICE OF THE PLAN(S)) WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS PRIOR TO EXPIRATION OF COVERAGE. YOU WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE RENEWED FOR ONE (1) YEAR UNLESS YOU NOTIFY US, IN WRITING, PRIOR TO THE PLAN EXPIRATION, BY MAIL: P.O. BOX 850, LINCOLNSHIRE, IL 60069 OR BY EMAIL: CANCEL@HWAHOMEWARRANT Y.COM. YOUR FIRST RENEWAL PAYMENT WILL SERVE AS YOUR AUTHORIZATION FOR ANOTHER YEAR. IF YOU REQUEST TO CANCEL AFTER AUTOMATIC RENEWAL TAKES PLACE, WE WILL HONOR YOUR REQUEST TO CANCEL IMMEDIATELY PURSUANT TO SECTION 12. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, OUR TOLL FREE NUMBER IS 1-855-DE-HELPS. YOU MAY CANCEL THIS CONTRACT AT ANY TIME AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 12.”    This Contract automatically renewed on March 17, 2015, per our agreement. No information was provided to us in reference to the cancellation of the Contract, until the customer called us on July 28, 2015, and advised she gave the cancellation to [redacted] and [redacted] who never provided it to us. She then provided the written cancellation information to us directly, we cancelled her Contract and we refunded her August payment.   As the contract was not cancelled until August, the payments made from March through July were valid and will not be refunded.   If you should have any questions or concerns, I can be reached at extension 5556340018.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling   [redacted] Escalated Special Handling [redacted]

October 26, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]/[redacted] ID-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   On August 11, 2016, the customer opened the following...

electrical claim online:   “Covered Item Problem: No Power To Part Of The Home Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: About a week ago Problem Description: There is no power in my garage. I've checked breaker boxes, and nothing appears to be switched off. Thanks!”   He provided the following e-mail (excerpts below) on August 26, 2016:   “Thank you, again, for your help with the garage electricity claim. Unfortunately, I did not notice until the repair person was already gone that whatever went wrong with with the electrical system also appears to have broken the garage door opener as well as my sprinker system control unit. As these are directly related to the electrical issue, would you please let me know what needs to be done to arrange a repair of these units under the claim as well?”   On August 29, 2016, the customer opened a Revdex.com complaint, making the following demand.   “I would like to have a service technician dispatched to repair my electrical outage. Immediately. Restitution regarding dying grass and landscaping due to non-functional irrigation systems that required the non-functional electrical supply are becoming necessary s well.”   The customer has filed now a second complaint referencing “Minor technicalities” and “contract loopholes”, but it appears that he is looking to have the contract address his garage door opener (eligible under the contract)and sprinkler system (excluded from the contract), claiming that both were damaged by an electrical failure or surge (which is not normal wear and tear and not included in our coverage-secondary damage.)       The customer then misquotes the contract with his statement:   “As an example, the contract states that a service technician will be dispatched within 2 days...”   The contract does not state that, as we cannot control the technician’s schedule.  The contract states in section III:   “HWA will dispatch Service Requests to an Authorized Repair Technician within 48 hours.”   It would seem, that after the warranty has covered approximately $750.00 in eligible repairs, the customer wishes to impugn the warranty service, and demand we address two failures, one of which is fully excluded from the contract.   We have sent a service request to a technician, per our contractual obligation, to diagnose the failure with the garage door system. If the failure is related to a power surge it will not be covered.       Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 26, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and per their...

contract, section V.A:   “HWA will pay up to $10 per pound for the cost for refrigerant for authorized repairs. You are responsible for payment of any costs in excess of $10 per pound.”   There has been no adjustment to the contract purchased by the customer, and they are responsible for the refrigerant recharge, over the $10.00 per pound cost.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

March 22, 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 rebuttal and are providing the following response. The customers accusation of being disingenuous, is blatantly false, as that is exactly what we were waiting for.   We have no way to force a technician to complete a repair any more than the customer does.  We have an agreement with the technician, and expect them to follow though, but if they decide not to, that is their prerogative. The diagnoses from the last technician matches a prior diagnosis.  The possibility of a failure with the Evaporator coil is not new information. The customer was never told that “the system was approved for replacement”.  The prior technician was looking to replace a compressor, and there were $610.00 in non covered costs. This is not, nor has ever been, a system replacement. Now, the customer is looking for the current technician to perform what they believe the prior technician quoted, at the prior technician’s  costs.  We do not blame the customer for the technician declining to perform the work, but the customer cannot hold us, or the new technician liable for the past technician’s failure. Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

September 15, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  Silva TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have...

received the customer’s complaint, and addressed this issue with the customer directly. (At no point was the customer lied to, in reference to the repair.   We are sorry that there was apparently confusion about the repair options.)   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 3, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] SC-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and provided a...

technician to address the reported failure.    The customer is dissatisfied with our service and is cancelling the coverage.   Though they are not entitled to a full refund, per contract, we are providing said refund as a courtesy.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 10, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] GA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and they have now advised that they...

will no longer address the issue with us.  They are arranging a full replacement through a technician we have not approved.  They have also advised that they will address this through legal channels.  We requested that their technician contact us to review the issue, but the customer has refused.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

Revdex.com,
I would like to remove my entire complaint ID [redacted] as the vendor is working with us.How do we completely remove this complaint from your website etc??
Sincerely,
[redacted]

August 22, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] TN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and have addressed the situation with...

the customer directly.    Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

October 21, 2015
[redacted]
[redacted]
Re: 94573764: Lords NV-[redacted]
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
We have received the customer's rebuttal, and provide the following response.
On October 19, 2015, a supervisor called the customer, and left a message. Later that afternoon, the customer called back, we offered a second opinion, and advised they needed to discuss and get back to us. They have not called us back, and are addressing the issue here.
The customer states the technician sent an e-mail to "HWA". If he could be more specific, as far as who the technician claims to have sent the e-mail to, I will gladly research. In fact, if he could forward both of these e-mails he states he received to me (c[redacted]@hwahomewarranty.com), I would be happy to review them.
Though, per the text of the e-mail that he copied into his rebuttal, it references the concrete tile roof tiles need to be removed. The warranty only addresses leaks in: "rolled, asphalt shingle, or clay tile roof structures only."
Sincerely,
Carl [redacted]
Escalated Special Handling

March 1, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted] CA-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s rebuttal and are providing the following response. To repeat: “we are looking for a diagnosis of why the problem is occurring so we can address the solution.  The warranty would not just replace a unit or pay for a replacement with out a confirmed cause of failure.” The technicians that have been sent have replaced the pump, and suggested misuse in reference to the failure. The customer wants us to just replace the unit without knowing what is wrong with the unit, and more to the point, what has caused the failure. We will not replace the unit, or provide payment to the customer for replacement, without knowing what is wrong with the unit and a cause of failure. This is why we are sending a technician to provide a diagnosis the issue. Without that diagnosis,  we will not do anything further.   Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

November 19, 2015[redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611Re: [redacted]  TX-[redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:Per our Contract, section I.A.1:“During the Coverage Period,
HWA’s™ sole responsibility will be to arrange for an Authorized Repair
Technician to provide Service(s) for Covered Systems and Components located on
the Covered Property in accordance with the definitions, terms and conditions
of this Contract.”To define, per section I.B.11:““Service” or “Services”
means the diagnosis and performance of the work, including parts and labor, to
repair or replace any Covered System and Component that becomes inoperable due
to a mechanical failure caused by routine wear and tear in accordance with the
provisions set forth in this Contract.”Additionally, per section
VII.I:“HWA has the sole right to
determine whether a covered appliance, system or component will be repaired or
replaced.”So, the customer’s statement
that we are required to replace or upgrade her system is not correct. The customer also refers to
the ban on R22 equipment, which does not go into effect until 2020.  R22 refrigerant, as well as the units that
use it, are still available and used. Finally, the customer claims
that a technician in September overcharged their system with 2 pounds of R22.  We require that technicians [redacted]ry insurance
to address damage that may occur to a customer’s property during the course of
a repair. If the customer wishes to file such a claim, that is their
prerogative.  We will happily provide her
the information if she wishes to file a claim, but per our Contract, section
VII.Q:“HWA will not be the
Authorized Repair Technician and HWA will not perform the Services hereunder.
HWA will only subcontract with Authorized Repair Technicians that meet its standards.
You agree that HWA is not liable for the negligence or the other conduct of the
Authorized Repair Technician, nor is HWA an insurer of the Authorized Repair
Technician’s performance.”We are not liable for the
technician’s supposed error, nor the new charge for the new unit.Sincerely,[redacted]Escalated Special Handling

January 17, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] : [redacted]  VA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received a second opinion on the reported diagnosis, and have...

requested the customer’s invoice, for review.    Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

August 3, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] WA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and provide the...

following response.   On July 23, 2017, we were contacted by the customer, who advised of a clogged sink, and a backup in the tub and basement.  At this time they claimed to have been contacting our office for 48 hours(but the complaint states 24), and had already contacted their own technician.  Per contact, we have the “sole and absolute right to select the Authorized Repair Technician to perform the Service”, and understanding the customer’s need, allowed them to use the technician they had called, advising we would reimburse based on our cost.   We have no indication of a call from the customer prior to July 23, 2017.   We have multiple names on this account, and either party can file a claim, or request information.   We have no recording of a disconnected call with our customer.    We are sorry that we are unwilling to pay the customer’s technician’s inflated bill for $1,380, for two  roddings and a hydrojet.   We will provide the offered reimbursement of our cost as agreed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President