Home Warranty of America

July 3, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s message, and the information provided to them was accurate, i.e.  the technician quotes their costs as far as the excluded items, and would need to provide a written quote is that is what the customer requests.   A verbal quote was provided and approved.   As a courtesy, based on the related issues, we are refunding the second paid fee.   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.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:1. The water heater installed on 10/01/2009 by a technician contracted with HWA. To my knowledge, at that time, the HWA technician did not test water pressure, mention water pressure or make any recommendations to address water pressure. Additionally, there is nothing in the water heater warranty installed on 10/01/2009 that addresses water pressure. This water heater had a warranty for 6 years (to 10/01/2015) and failed on 10/10/16. It was well past the 6-year mark; the water heater lasted more than a full year past the warranty date. According to the Internet: "Electric water heaters generally last 8 to 10 years, while gas water heaters may have a slightly shorter lifespan of 6 to 8 years." Water pressure did not affect or shorten the lifespan of the water heater. Clearly, the water heater failed due to normal wear and tear and HWA should provide the cost for the replacement as I have requested. 2. Suspiciously, no HWA customer service rep indicated that the failed water heater would not be covered under the contract, until a supervisor contacted me a FULL 8 DAYS AFTER THE DIAGNOSIS (9 DAYS AFTER MY CLAIM). However, the day after the technician made his diagnosis (on 10/12/16), we received a call from HWA indicating all the "non-covered items" we would be responsible for at a cost of $950 AND THE WATER HEATER ITSELF WAS NOT AMONG THOSE NON-COVERED ITEMS. Was the "excessive water pressure to the home" a diagnosis concocted by HWA in the week that followed? Was the diagnosis encouraged or thrust upon the technician by HWA? Did HWA ask the technician to attempt to provide a reason so HWA could avoid coverage under the contract? This is totally unacceptable customer service and breach of contract. HWA should provide the cost for the replacement as I have requested.3. Further adding question to the HWA claim that the technician represented "water heater was leaking internally, due to excessive water pressure to the home" the technician who diagnosed the water heater gave us a different diagnosis to us in writing: "Water heater leaks. Needs replacement." The water heater was leaking externally into the drainpan precisely designed for that purpose, and leaking exactly where the failed water heater in 2009 leaked. According to the Internet: "Water heaters are designed to withstand pressures of up to 150 psi". Water pressure is not addressed - in the 2009 water heater warranty or in the 2016 new water heater warranty installed by our plumber. While the technician may have recommended to HWA that other "non-covered" items could be added at an "out-of-pocket cost" of $950 to us (including a pressure regulator, a gas line, a T&P drain line, and an expansion tank), these items are not required by CA code, no other close neighbors in the area have these items in addition to their water heaters, and our plumber who replaced the water heater for us on 10/12/16 indicated there was no need for these additional items. This definitely casts doubt on the "non-covered items" recommended and on the technician's ability to provide the REASON for the failure of the water heater. According to the Internet, if there is "excessive water pressure" then there would be irregular water pressure from faucets throughout the home and other valves and pipes throughout the home may leak (including valves on the water heater, which did not occur). Again, the water heater was past the warranty period, and no such problems indicating "excessive water pressure" are evident or have occurred at our home in the 7 years we have lived here. Therefore, it may be the technician contracts with HWA to have opportunity (such as this one) to recommend additional plumbing work/items in order to make a greater profit off the customer. This is offensive to the customer. HWA should provide the cost for the replacement as I have requested.4. I have spoken with two technicians ([redacted] and [redacted]) at the the water company that provides water to our neighborhood and home. I specifically asked about water pressure. According to them, optimal and average pressure in our area is 74 to 80 psi and is not excessive water pressure. Additionally: "PSI and a back flow would not affect your water heater performance and longevity". According to them, the technician who contracted with HWA absolutely could not predict any "excessive water pressure to the home" would CAUSE the failure of the water heater, particularly to a water heater that is past the warranty period. Neither water technician at the water company had even heard of the "expander tank" installation, one of the "non-covered items" recommended by the technician. HWA should provide the cost for the replacement as I have requested.5. HWA simply has found a way to deny this claim in a very unfair, inequitable manner (and perhaps fraudulent manner). There is no way the HWA technician could make a prediction about the failure of the water heater, particularly a failure that has occurred past the warranty period. This water heater lasted more than 7 years, which is well beyond the warranty period. We believe HWA's representations in this regard are doubtful, and may be concocted or solicited from the HWA technician. HWA simply wants to worm out of the contract that we have had 8 years in a row (and in some years, we have not had any claims at all). HWA should provide the cost for the replacement as I have requested.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

March 7, 2018     Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] AL-3013297     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry and...

provided a technician to diagnose the plumbing failure in the home.    The issue is still being reviewed by the customer’s homeowners insurance, and we have assigned an additional technician to investigate the plumbing.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

June 30, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer filed the following electrical complaint online:...

  “Covered Item Problem: Outlet/s Not Working Has this item ever worked?: No When did you first notice the problem?: About a month ago Q & A: Q: Please Tell Us What Room/s You Are Experiencing A Problem With the Outlet/s A: Porch/Outside Problem Description: There are about 4 outlets that are not working outside and in the garage (attached). One outlet by garage door in front of house, two in garage, and one on backside of house by garage.  Also doorbell for front door isn't working either.”   Before we could contract her to address the specifics of the eligibility of this claim, she filed multiple complaints online.   The claim was filed, and the issues were addressed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  They never addressed the complaint with me like they said.  They never accepted the responsibility about the complaint.  I still do not have a refrigerator, but today I did receive a check from them.  Their customer service is horrible.  This company should never be used for home warranty coverage.  They do not tell the truth, their documentation is inaccurate and they never return phone calls.  Again, they never addressed the complaint with me and I want an apology for their inadequate resolution of this claim.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

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.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

February 23, 2018     [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 inquiry and the...

day the issue was received by our office, we confirmed the repair of their unit was approved with the technician.    We have called the customer to confirm the repair is complete, and left a message.   Sincerely,   [redacted] Office of the President

September 29, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We provided the vendor an e-mail that explains the coverage for our real estate contracts.  This is not the coverage that the customer purchased, because his warranty was not purchased with a real estate transaction.   The customer then states:   “I also know that they have paid for others claims who purchased the product as I have.”   We have paid the $10 per pound for refrigerant for other customer’s that purchased the same contract as the customer.  The warranty provides coverage for eligible systems and components, within the bounds of our contract.   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.
Sincerely,
Gay [redacted] I was not trying to be paid twice.  I received a check days after I filed the complaint.  Blame it on the post office?

June 29, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006   Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] OK-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The call was pulled and was reviewed.  At no time was the customer told our service agreement has no exclusions.   Sincerely,   [redacted] Office of the President

January 19, 2016 Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted] AZ-961014 Dear Ms. [redacted]: We do not provide customers call recordings or transcripts of calls. We review calls, and based upon those reviews, we address a customer’s concerns. In this case, we reviewed the calls, confirmed what we told the customer and we will not reimburse for non covered pipe modifications.   Sincerely, Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

June 19, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted]  NC-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and spoke to them on June 15, 2017,...

providing them the specifics of the cash out offer.   To explain with specifics, the customer has a confirmed mechanical failure in their evaporator coil.  The warranty is looking to address the failure, but per government requirement, the condenser must be upgraded to match the new coil.     We have offered the customer the replacement of the coil, but he has not approved the required replacement condenser costs. We have also offered our cost on the replacement coil.   We are waiting for the customer’s response.     Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

May 17, 2017   [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 daughter’s complaint, and provide the following...

response.   The customer has had three issues with their HVAC system in the course of their contract, which will expire in approximately a week.   Six days after the contract started, the customer reported a refrigerant leak in their AC unit.  The technician found a leak in the king valve, and repaired it, recharging the unit with Puron.   In late September 2016, their outside unit would not come on. A technician was assigned,  who repaired the unit under their repair limit.   On February 26, 2017, the customer’s daughter reported that the unit was never repaired in September.  Per Contract section 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”   The technician’s fee could not be waived approximately five months after the reported failure.   The technician addressed the repair, and a little over two month later, the customer’s daughter called our office demanding a new unit.  We resent a technician who found that the customer’s zone control board failed, which is excluded from the coverage.     To address their analogy, every cell phone has a screen and a battery, but not every cell phone has a cellular signal booster.  Like every AC unit has a condenser and a coil, but not a zone board to control where the cool air goes in the home.   We are sorry the customer’s daughter is disappointed in our coverage, but we will not replace their HVAC system, over a non-covered failure.      Sincerely, [redacted] DE Services HWA Claims Handling Manager

May 12, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MS [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We are in discussions with the customer’s representation, in order to resolve the issue. ...

Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

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

6, 2015, A claim was filed for the customer’s Kitchen Refrigerator, stating that the unit was not cooling or coming on. Per contract, a technician was assigned to diagnose the failure with the unit.   Hours later, the customer called our office requesting same day service, which we managed to arrange on the customer’s behalf.  That evening, the technician called our office with a diagnosis, stating that the unit was plugged into an older GFI outlet, which was causing the breaker  to trip.  The refrigerator was cooling and operating properly.  The technician also stated that the required trade service fee was not paid.  We called the customer to advise there was nothing the warranty could do in regards to a unit that we were advised was still functional.  The customer complained about the service, and though we offered to send the technician back to re-evaluate her system, the customer declined. Per the customer’s invoice, on May 10, 2015, the refrigerator was replaced outside of the warranty. A few days before February 8, 2016, we received a bill from the technician for the unpaid trade fee from the refrigerator claim in 2015. We paid the trade fee, and  sent the customer a notice advising of the funds due, and referencing Contract section III.D:  “Failure to pay the Service Fee will result in suspension of coverage until such time as the proper Service Fee is paid. At that time, coverage will be reinstated, but the contract period will not be extended.”  Thus, the contract was in a suspension status as of February 8, 2016. Five days later, on Saturday February 13, 2016, at 5:00 PM,  the customer called our office to file a plumbing claim for a kitchen faucet. She was aware that her contract was suspended(but did not think it had occurred yet), and repeated her complaints in reference to the refrigerator issue. We advised we were looking into waiving the trade fee that the customer claims was paid, as a courtesy, which would have occurred less than 2 days later, on Monday morning. 41 minutes after the phone call, the customer purchased a brand new faucet and adapters outside the warranty. Per our contract, section III.C: “HWA™ has the sole and absolute right to select the Service Provider to perform the service; and HWA™ will not reimburse for services performed without its prior approval.” As we have no diagnosis addressing a failure with the refrigerator or the kitchen faucet, and did not approve those replacements, we would not reimburse for either item.  We are sorry about the difficulties the customer had with the technician, and have paid the fee that the technician claims was due.  We would not provide additional reimbursement to  the customer for the replacements arranged outside of our coverage. Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 13, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted]  AZ-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s message, and have approved the...

replacement.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

October 13, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Again “The vendor has been approved, and has been told the pickup and install the equipment. “ This was arranged with the technician 10 days ago.   The customer was implying that we considered  “metal work as "incidental" to the repairs being made”  We do not consider this  modification to the customer’s home as incidental.  We just do not cover it.   We provide contractual coverage for the customer until April 24, 2017.  The technician has the equipment and can perform the install.  If the customer wishes to wait until next April,  to have the technician complete the installation, that is there prerogative.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

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.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

August 15, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] OK-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have provided the customer the contract reference where it specifies that base pans (diagnostic received) and grout (diagnosis from customer) are excluded from coverage.   We are sorry the customer feels that this is asinine, but we will not refund his trade fee, for the technician’s diagnosis.  The contract was provided to the customer, and is available to him whenever he wishes to examine it.  Thus,  this information was disclosed, and does not warrant a refund of the trade fee that the customer is required to pay.     Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President