Home Warranty of America

July 28, 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 are waiting for his...

invoice for review.     Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

May 23, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: [redacted] NC-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: On May 9, 2016,  at 7:14 PM CST, the following claim was filed online on our website: ...

“Covered Item Problem: Straight Air Conditioner - used in air conditioning season only When did you first notice the problem?: Today Q & A: Q: Has the air conditioner ever worked properly for you A: Yes Q: Please Tell us the nature of the problem you are experiencing A: I had my own HVAC professional out to perform maintenance and they found a problem Q: Please tell us how the air conditioner worked for you previous to this problem A: Did not cool very well Q: Have you had maintenance performed on the system A: No Q: How many units do you have A: One Q: Please tell us which part of the home is not cooling A: Entire House Q: Please tell us how long the unit has been running properly for this season. A: About 2 Weeks Problem Description: We had two different hvac professionals come out to look at the unit because it was not blowing out cold air. Both companies told us the fan and the motor and the compressor is not working on the air conditioning unit. They mentioned that the repairs would cost about $2000 and advised us that we should think about replacing it because the unit is 20 years old and the repairs are about half the cost of replacing the unit altogether. Per our agreement with the customer, our contract states:    ·         Section III.A: “You or Your agent (including tenant if specifically authorized  by the Home Owner) must notify HWA for Service Requests to  be performed under this Contract as soon as the problem is  discovered. HWA will accept Service Requests 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year at 1-888-HWA-RELY or online  at www.HWAHomeWarranty.com. To be covered, notice must be  given to HWA prior to expiration of this Contract.” We were not contacted when the problem was discovered.  In fact, it seems like a problem was noticed at some point on May 9th or prior, as multiple technician’s were called to the property, diagnosed a  repair (but recommended a replacement), and then someone contacted us to report the claim. ·          Section III.B: “HWA will dispatch Service  Requests to an Authorized Repair Technician within 48  hours.” We assigned a technician per contract, when we were advised of the claim on the evening of May 9.  On the morning of the May 11, we were told that  the assigned technician refused to take the call, and a different technician was assigned to take the call.  When that technician called to schedule, they were advised that the unit had already been replaced. ·         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).” Over the days in question(the evening of May 9-May 13), there was a local high temperature of 87 degrees, and a low temperature of 60 degrees.  ·         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.” The customer selected their own technician to perform a repair/replacement.  We did not.  We would not reimburse the customer for the replacement that they approved their technician to perform outside the contract and without our approval. As a courtesy, we offered the customer’s representation a full refund of their contract cost, upon receipt of written request to cancel the contract.  Their representation declined, and threatened legal action, as well as complaints of this nature.   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]: [redacted] NH-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and have contacted them...

directly.   The customer replaced the unit, as stated in their complaint, and we are calculating a reimbursement for eligible costs.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 26, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s rebuttal, and provide the following response.   Per contract section VII.I:   “HWA has the sole right to determine whether a covered appliance, system or component will be repaired or replaced.”   We are sorry for the delays and inconvenience, but until we are advised by a licensed technician that the unit cannot be repaired, we will address the repairs the technician advises are needed.    Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

June 14, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] KS-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s concern, and provide the following response. ...

  On June 2, 2017, the customer reported that when they first moved into the property, they noticed that the door of the unit drops down to the floor.   Per our contract, we assigned a technician to diagnose the failure.   Three days later, the customer reported that the technician came to the home, collected their trade fee, and did not properly repair their unit, alleging that the technician damaged their property.  They wanted the fee that had been paid, to be waived.   Per the vendor, they diagnosed the unit, found no mechanical failure with the door, which did not drop to the floor.  They denied that they received payment from the customer, stating that the customer refused to pay them because ‘they didn’t do anything’.   The warranty requires that systems and components  be in place and in proper working order, and become inoperative due to normal wear.  Per information received, there is no mechanical failure with the dishwasher.   The customer questions our liability for the technician’s actions.  We cannot take responsibility for their actions, any more than we can take responsibility for the customer’s actions.   The customer has requested their contract be cancelled, and we have processed their request.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

Customer: Eric [redacted] Account No: [redacted] Claim No: [redacted]     HWA is correspondence of the complaint associated with the above referenced claim and account numbers. We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and are more than happy to provide you a breakdown of the...

current situation.   We have previously had our licensed repair technician inspect the issue with the dishwasher associated with the above referenced claim number. Because of the numerous issues found with the unit, HWA has decided to replace it for Mr[redacted]. Regarding the coverage that Mr[redacted] mentioned, he is correct. He does have coverage for professional series appliances. Mr[redacted] did also send us attachments. Unfortunately, neither of the attachments contained any pictures of the unit. He was advised of this issue both times. The licensed repair technician was able to verify that the unit is not a professional series appliance.   We have provided several options for Mr[redacted]. We understand that Mr[redacted] does not agree with this buyout amount and we apologize. Contractually, our cash offers are offered at HWA rates and not retail rates.   We have also offered a replacement option to Mr[redacted]. Our Purchasing department does not make any offers unless we have found a unit that matches the features of the customer’s current unit. We have again looked into the replacement unit to ensure that it contained similar features to the unit that Mr[redacted] currently has. We have been able to verify that it does.   In addition, in efforts to provide Mr[redacted] with the best customer service we can offer; we have provided him with an alternate solution. We have advised him that he may choose a unit that he would like, and HWA would purchase it for him at HWA rates. There is an upgrade fee associated with the units he has requested, but he would not be paying retail rates for an upgrade. He would be paying our HWA contracted rates with GE or Whirlpool.   Contractually, our language states that we reserve the right to only offer a cashback resolution for a repair or replacement at HWA rates. This language is found in section VII,Q in our contract. However, HWA has provided different solutions to Mr[redacted] to assist him with his issue. We apologize that the solutions are not something Mr[redacted] agrees with, but these options do remain and are the only options we have for him.   We look forward to continue our work with Mr[redacted]. We will continue the process as soon as he provides us with his decision.   Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Should you have further questions, please feel free to contact me directly at [redacted].   Sincerely,

March 21, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: Hill  GA-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s...

complaint and are providing the following response. The Air Conditioning unit the customer is referring to is a non ducted wall unit, Model # [redacted].  As the technician originally advised us, this unit should be under warranty with the manufacturer, but we would have no information in reference to that coverage, except that it goes into effect before our coverage, Per Contract section VII.M: “HWA’s responsibilities will be secondary to any other extended or in-home warranties that exist for the included systems, components and appliances. “ If the customer cannot access the manufacturers warranty, the warranty cannot address that, as the unit should be under their warranty.   If the manufacturers warranty is only in place for the company that purchased  the unit 2 years ago(most probably during renovation), and not the party they sold the property to shortly thereafter, the air conditioning becomes eligible under our Contract.  Per our Contract, section V.C, the coverage includes: “ Ducted electric central air conditioning, ducted electric wall air conditioning, geothermal/water source heat pumps, and water evaporative coolers - All components and parts except for geothermal/water source heat pumps, all components and parts that are located within the foundation of the home or attached garage.” The Non-Ducted wall air conditioner is not eligible under our coverage, so this issue would not be addressed under the Contract.        Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
The warranty does not require a visual or mechanical inspection which is affirmed by HWA current response. However, they conclude that if our home inspector took apart the furnace the damage would have been identified. This does not make sense. This is contradictory. It appears to me that HWA creates a condition to allow them under any circumstances to deny a claim by stating an inspection was not done when the warranty does not require the inspection. The intent of the warranty is to cover unknown or unexpected conditions. The condition is unknown to both HWA and to me. They should honor the intent of the contract as  business. Basically they just do not want to honor the language of their contract wording. 
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]

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

following response.   On July 13, 2016, the customer opened a 13 month home warranty with our company.   On the morning of July 18, 2016, the customer filed the following refrigerator claim online:   “Covered Item Problem: Not Cooling Brand: ** Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: Yesterday Have you moved into the home?: No Q & A: Q: Please tell us what type of refrigerator you have A: Freezer on the bottom Q: Please tell where the refrigerator is located A: Kitchen Problem Description: I went to get a bottle of water out of the fridge yesterday afternoon while doing some painting and moving some boxes into the house, and the water was not very cold. Opened up the freezer portion then as well and the ice in the ice maker had melted because it was to warm in there. Thought maybe someone had left the door opened so I cleaned out all the melted ice and made sure the doors were closed. I checked back on it this morning 7/18/2016 and it is still not cooled down so clearly something is not acting right. It is an ** stainless steel side by side fridge with the pull out freezer below. It does not have the water or ice dispenser on it, just the automatic ice maker in the freezer. “   Per our contractual agreement, a technician was assigned to diagnose the unit.  On July 21, 2016, the technician advised us that the 6-12 year old unit was restricted and overheating, due to a design flaw in the unit. The technician also confirmed that they had previously addressed this issue for the prior homeowner.   We requested documentation from the customer, confirming that the unit was in proper working order.   The documentation was provided, and we determined we would move forward with the repair. We contacted the technician, who now stated the unit was not repairable, though they claimed to have repaired it previously.  At that time, we requested a second opinion, and are waiting for the diagnosis.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

November 2, 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 inquiry, and provide the...

following response.   On September 7, 2017, the customer renewed their warranty, with a week lapse in coverage   On September 16, 2017, the customer reported an error code indication on the dishwasher.  Per our contractual agreement, we immediately processed a claim, and sent a work order to a technician to diagnose the issue.   On September 25, 2017, the technician went to the property, and found an electrical failure with the board, and a worn out drain pump.  We approved the technician to perform the repair.   On October 14, 2017, we were advised of a parts delay from the manufacturer, and continued to wait for an update.     On October 25, 2017, we ordered a control board, to expedite the repair.   On October 28, 2017, the customer advised that the parts were installed, but the unit still was not working.  We called the technician, for an update.    On  October 31, 2017, the technician advised of non-normal wear damage to the wiring of the unit, which is not covered under contract.  When the customer was advised, they requested to cancel their contract, which is in process.   The customer is now, mid cancellation, requesting the warranty cover the non-eligible repair, or provide a full refund, which they are not entitled to under the contract.   We would request, in response, a diagnosis from a licensed technician supporting their position that the dishwasher failure is from normal wear.   Otherwise, we will continue the requested cancellation following the terms of the contract.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I understand that a comment has been communicated from HWA stating why the refrigerator claim has been rejected.  However my statement is that the justification for rejecting the claim is not in line with our contract.  Please re evaluate the contractual language and provide an update based upon my claim. Thanks 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

November 13, 2015[redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611[redacted]Dear [redacted]We have received the customer’s
rebuttal, and are providing the following response. The customer accuses me of
making false statements in his rebuttal, but does not support that accusation in
any way. Per my initial response:“On March 24, 2014, the
customer purchased our Contract online. 
When the Contract was purchased, the Contract was marked to
automatically renew.”I do not address who marked
the contract to renew, or accuse the customer of doing so, I only state that it
was.  I know this because the contract
renewed. I apologize if there was some delay in his refund, if there indeed
was, but that does not mean the customer would receive a refund of his prior
contract, in reference to said supposed delay.As to his second point, this
is the exact statement that was made by the customer in his online claim:“Covered Item Problem: Heat
Pump System - Same system used for heating and cooling When did you first notice the
problem?: Two days ago Q & A: Q: Has the air conditioner
ever worked properly for you A: Yes Q: Please Tell us the nature
of the problem you are experiencing A: Other Q: Please tell us how the air
conditioner worked for you previous to this problem A: No problems Q: Have you
had maintenance performed on the system A: No Q: How many units do you have
A: One Q: Please tell us which part
of the home is not cooling A: Other Q: Please tell us how long
the unit has been running properly for this season. A: More than 2 Months Problem Description: Water
has begun flowing from the secondary drain pipe. It has never done this since I
bought the house two years ago. Water is dripping from the primary drip pan
pipe, but is also flowing from the secondary drip pan pipe. There is either a
hole in the primary pan or the drain is partially clogged on the primary pan
for it to have water running out of the secondary drain pipe. The air
conditioner is working fine otherwise. This needs to be fixed ASAP, please.”The customer suggests two
possibilities as to the water leaking from his system.  We sent a technician as our agreement directs
us to, and the technician found the problem.   The customer, in hindsight, is
saying we should have called him after he filed his claim online, and advised
him that the claim was not covered. 
However, if the issue had been a leaking pan, it would have been eligible,
and the customer could adjust his complaint to  how we have evaded addressing his claim.  We feel it is better to diagnose the claim
that the customer has filed, than advise them the issue is not covered without
knowing what it is. Thus, I have made no false
statements in reference to these issues, and our former customer is trying to
create an issue from nothing, to justify a reimbursement that he is not
entitled to, and that we are not offering. Sincerely,[redacted]Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: you send out a contractor the first time and they are clueless and don't fix the problem. then a 2nd time, then a 3rd. it takes 3 times before you fix anything. yes some claims have been fixed but it took 3 plumbers back in the summer and your supervisor didn't want to do that. said I should expect the leaking sink the guy didn't fix. the roof guy took my money. he didn't even check the roof out. I paid like 500 for the warranty so if 3 months are left you owe me something.
Sincerely,
Jeff [redacted]

September 20, 2016   Lucille Garcia 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 the technician has been approved to complete the repair.  The equipment was ready for pickup as of September 19, 2016.     Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 25, 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 as they state, the repair is completed.   We apologize for any unnecessary delays that may have occurred.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I complained 43 days because the technician said that he called his rep. and would have a remote sent to me.  I'm sorry that I trusted the technician that you sent to my residence.  I certainly will not in the future.  I called the technician and specifically asked what a good time frame would be to expect the remote.  He said it could be up to a month.  I gave them a little extra time just in case the processing took a bit longer than expected.  After calling the technician back he informed me I would not be getting the additional remote after all.I now understand that your contract states “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.”  In other words, this just says that Home Warranty of America won't back up any of the service they provide to you.  I encourage anyone looking for a home warranty to look at other options.
Sincerely,
Steven [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: they refuse to offer any resolution/remedy and simply regurgitate the same statement without providing any supporting documentation.  They also continue to state that "we refused to schedule" with the second technician which is completely false. While HWA is "not required" to pay for expedited shipping, that doesn't mean that "can't."  It will be interesting if the third technician reaches the same diaganoses (bad compressor) as the first 2, and yet 17 days later, still no part on order.  Per a phone call with the 4th company (yes, we had to call them), we could have to wait up to 15 BUSINESS days for the part to come in.  We could be without a refrigerator for over a month.  Yet HWA doesn't seemed at all concerned at the inconvenience this creates for their customer and can't be bothered to cover the minor cost (as a percent of the total repair cost) for resolving this issue as quickly as possible.  NO RESPONSE REQUIRED FROM HWA
[redacted]Soon to be ex-HWA customer

August 12, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  [redacted] KY-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   On July 24, 2016, the customer opened an Air conditioning claim.   Per our contractual agreement, we immediately assigned a technician to diagnose the failure.   On July 26, 2016, the customer called and stated that the technician did not address the issue and wanted a second opinion.   We had no diagnosis from the technician, but as a courtesy, sent a second opinion.   On July 27, 2016, the customer called our office stating that the second opinion wanted them to pay over $3,000 to replace the system, and have us reimburse.  As this is not proper warranty procedure, we sent another technician to provide a proper diagnosis, at no cost to the customer.   On July 29, 2016, the technician diagnosed the issue.   On July 30, 2016, we received the replacement information from the technician.   On July 31, 2016, we called the customer with the breakdown of the non-covered costs.  The customer declined to pay their portion, so the only option was a cashout on our cost of the replacement (referenced in contract section VII.O).   On August 2, 2016, the customer advised they had already replaced their system, and accepted the cashout amount.   So, the issue is resolved, and we decline the customer’s demand that we pay half of their retail coil replacement cost.  ($1,400.00)   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 30, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the diagnosis, and are addressing the repair.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 15, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] LA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The warranty is not responsible for the customer’s retail costs for a replacement 20+ year old Air handler, or the upgrade costs of a replacement working condenser.   The customer is talking about two components, and we are not responsible for upgrading a working condenser if the air handler fails.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President