Home Warranty of America

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:You claim to have made contact with me June 18, 2016? I have still yet to receive one call from your company and to my knowledge still have yet to order the part needed to make my repair. I did call your company myself yesterday, to inquire about the "cash out" amount which is ridiculously low and takes 4-6 weeks to obtain.  So please refrain from making lies upon contacting me and ordering parts. I would love to have a phone call from your company to discuss further. Over two weeks without A/C with 90+ degree days is a little dangerous for living conditions, wouldn't you say? 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

September 8, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AR-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and the requested repair...

has been approved.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 31, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]  NC-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer’s payments are being refunded.  One was addressed on July 26, the other on July 30.  The customer has the ability to reopen the claim if they desire, but the payments are being returned, whether the complaint is open or closed.     Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

December 8, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have made our points in the prior response, and the customer’s public legal threats will not change the fact that these problems were not only related to a prior improper repair, but would have been detectable during the referenced ‘tune up’.   The customer is free to take any further steps deemed necessary, and we will respond as needed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: the unit was working properly, I know it was. They have no proof that it wasn't. They just decided that it wasn't so they don't have to pay anything. Where is the proof that it wasn't working? 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

July 20, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry and apologize for the lack of a return...

supervisor call.   I personally have spoken to the customer, and have processed the approval of their dishwasher repair. The technician is ordering the replacement part.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

July 11, 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 message, and they have already...

requested that their contract be cancelled, which is in process, per contract section VIII.E.     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]: [redacted] OH-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   On October 10, 2016, we received the diagnosis from the technician,...

which was a clogged fan, which needed cleaning. The customer should not have been charged for the service, as it was related to the original claim.   Please note: The customer opened the first claim in May, the second in September(4 months later, and outside the vendor’s warranty), and then a recall. They were not charged for the recall.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

March 13, 2016   Lucille G[redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: 12005966: [redacted] IL-2453664     Dear Ms. G[redacted]:   The opinions of the customer’s technician’s have no relevance to our costs for replacement, and we never advised the technician that the customer would be fully reimbursed for the technician’s retail cost.   The customer is free to continue his complaint, but we have paid he more than we are responsible for and we will pay no more on this issue.   Sincerely,     Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

September 20, 2016   Lucille Garcia Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] NV-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]   We have received...

the customer’s complaint, and the replacement was approved on September 21, 2016.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 27, 2016   [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 complaint, and addressed this issue...

with them directly.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 22, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted]  CA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following...

response.   The customer claims the initial vendor that was sent to their property damaged their system.  Per our contractual agreement with the customer, Section VI.Q:   “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.”   The customer is demanding that we take financial liability for damages that they claim the technician caused to their property.  Even if this did occur, we are not liable financially for the technician’s actions.   This is why the technician carries liability insurance. If the customer wishes, we can provide  it to the customer at their request.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

February 4, 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 customer’s complaint...

and the issue was addressed with them directly on February 3, 2016. Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

November 9, 2017     [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 the customer’s inquiry, and provide the...

following response.   Per our warranty contract, Section I.B.7,  the warranty addresses “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.”   The customer’s two HVAC systems, as he states, were in proper working order on the coverage period start date, and  have become inoperative, due to a failed component (i.e.  a leaking inside air handler in each system).  The other primary component, the outside heat pumps, are in fair condition and still work properly.    Unfortunately, due to changes in national HVAC regulations, the coils needed to repair the customer’s air handlers are no longer available, and the entire Air Handler must be upgraded and replaced. The warranty contract would not upgrade the working parts of the customer’s existing system (i.e. the existing external heat pump condensers), so the customer would be liable for paying for the upgrade to that part of the system to match the new Air  Handler, or accept our cash out.        Specific Contract reference:   Section I.B 7: (referenced above) Section V.A: “Except as noted above or when the optional 13 SEER/R-410A modifications coverage is included in Platinum and Diamond Plans, HWA will not pay for any modifications or upgrades necessitated by the repair of existing equipment or the installation of new equipment” Section IV.K: “If government regulations prevent HWA from repairing or replacing a covered air conditioning system, or heating system with similar efficiency or capacity, and HWA provides an upgraded unit pursuant to Section V(A) or V(C) of this Contract, then HWA will also pay for up to $1,000 in the aggregate during the Contract Period for modifications or upgrades to valves, line sets, evaporator coils, pads, stands, plumbing, flues, additional costs associated with evacuating and cleaning the system of all R-22 and crane charges required to complete the replacement installation of the heating or air conditioning system.” 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.”   The warranty addresses the mechanical failure (i.e. failed air handler) of the component of the customer’s system.  We would not upgrade their condensers to match the air handlers, and would provide and install the replacement air handlers(which the customer’s chosen technician refused) or a check for our cost of the replacement air handlers.   We are sorry, but we can no longer legally repair the customer’s existing system, and contractually would not upgrade the part that has not failed.  With his technician’s position, we can only send him a check, and will do so, upon receipt of his proof of replacement.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

We did request for a supervisor, after the rep we were talking to had a rude attitude towards our questions. We were asking about the specific coverage of appliances, specifically regarding the hvac unit. We did ask specifically if the warranty covered replacement of units that were too small. To which the supervisor responded that no the company did not. We then asked if the company would be able to assist in any way at all if the unit was too small, again the supervisor stated that they would not. My wife did mention the rudeness of reps almost every time we have had to call in, what was not mentioned was that on at least 2 claims the rep did not completely listen to what our request was and only part of what we were asking for was actually looked at. Our request for reimbursement was in regards to the cancellation of the contract and the fact that we felt we were not getting what we thought was a fair purchase for our money. At that time, as the ride rep we talked to before the supervisor gave us the information on how to cancel, the supervisor stated that would be up to the cancellation dept. As for my review, the person who responded did not have all the information and only assumed a response. To which they also lied, and tried to publically discredit my review to the company. 
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]

March 16, 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 are providing the following response. The...

customer opened a warranty contract with us on May 18, 2015. On may 28, 2015, $490.00 was paid for her Contract. In the course of the Contract period  they have filed 4 claims: In June, they reported a failure with their Air Conditioning system. Per the technician’s diagnosis, the unit was cooling properly and there was no mechanical failure with the system. In December, a claim was opened in reference to the Heating system, which was stated was related to the Air Conditioning failure.  They did not want the technician that came out on the precious claim, so a second technician was sent.  The second technician found the customer’s Zone Controller failing, which is excluded, per section V.A of our Contract.(Now, she is requesting we pay for this ‘motherboard’ at $485.20) In December, a claim was opened on the customer’s tankless water heater, because she had to keep resetting it.  The technician recommended that the unit be maintained(descaled), and quoted a price to do so.  In February, the  customer requested to reopen the claim, stating she had the unit descaled.  We requested proof of the maintenance, and she had no proof (stated her father performed it.  She got upset and ended the call.   She called back three days ago, and we are resending a technician to evaluate. In March, the customer reported water in her ductwork after a storm, stating it was not related to her Air conditioning.  As we would not address a roof leak in her home, or storm damage, she advised she would speak with her association.  (We heard nothing else on this issue until now, when she states it is a “Freezing up AC coil”.  She claims it is covered, but we have no diagnosis as to why it is freezing up.  She did not advise us of this issue after her technician diagnosed it.  She just decided to pay for it outside of her warranty, at a cost of $208.00 ) The customer has given us our option of two ‘demands’: A refund of $580.00(though they never paid $580.00 for the Warranty Contract), after using the coverage for 11 months.  They are not even referencing a cancellation of their Contract, per section VIII.E.  They just wish $580.00 that they never paid for the coverage.   Payment for two items:  a Zone Contol Board that is excluded from their Contract, and repair done outside of the Warranty Contract, that we have no specific information about, and did not approve. As we are not expected to do either of these per our Contractual Agreement, we decline both of their demands, and will wait for the technician to provide the diagnosis of their water heater. Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 28, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]  MO- [redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer should then contact our office to report the issue, so the vendor can be sent to re-evaluate the issue.    Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I made a service call and your brokered technician from [redacted] came to my home on 6/30.  I witnessed him pressure test the unit and his diagnosis was that there was no visible leak so he recommended that we add more freon (which we did).  If that isn't evidence that he deemed the unit to be in working condition but need of repair, I'm not sure what other evidence you need.    
Sincerely,
[redacted]

February 5, 2018     Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] NJ-993630     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry and apologize...

for the delay in the technician contacting the vendor to schedule service.  We have confirmed the service has been scheduled with the technician and the customer.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

August 3, 2016   [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 are providing...

the following response.   The customer opened a warranty contract with us on July 17, 2016.   On August 11, 2015, the customer filed the following Refrigerator claim online, stating:   “Covered Item Problem: Ice Maker Brand: [redacted] Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: About a week ago Have you moved into the home?: Yes When did you move into the home?: 07/17/2015 Q & A: Q: Please tell us what the problem with the ice maker is A: Other Problem Description: The ice in the door is not working.  It will not let ice drop.” This claim was not processed by our system, because, per contract section VI.C, the contract specifically excludes:   “Water and ice dispensers and their respective equipment”   That day we advised the customer why the issue would not be covered.   On August 27, 2015, the customer called back, stating the unit was not dispensing, and stopped making ice on August 20, 2015 .  We assigned a technician per contract, who advised that the issue was with the dispenser (which is not covered).  The customer requested a second opinion. The second opinion came out, and addressed the issue with ice production(stating the metal bar was staying up to stop the ice production).   On the morning of June 27, 2016, the customer filed a Refrigerator claim online, stating:   “Covered Item Problem: Ice Maker Brand: [redacted] Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: More than one month ago Q & A: Q: Please tell us what the problem with the ice maker is A: Is Not Making Ice Q: Please tell us how many times this item has worked properly since the contract start date A: Never Q: Please tell us what type of refrigerator you have A: Side by Side Q: Please tell where the refrigerator is located A: Kitchen Problem Description: The ice maker is not working properly, you have sent a service tech a couple of times and it will make ice for a bit then will stop.  The line freezes and then the ice maker cannot make ice.  Please do not send the same company that has already been out a couple of times.   A technician was assigned, and we had received no specifics of their diagnosis, until August 3, 2016, when they reported a bad water valve.    We have no information about a scheduled service call on July 27, 2016, except from the customer’s statement, and would not be liable for the technician making that appointment and not showing.   As to their plumbing service, we addressed the eligible cartridge, but would not address any restriction in their fresh water line.   We will be contacting the customer in reference to their refrigerator, per the update received today.  We will not refund ‘all monies paid’  to technicians for service fees under the contract.       Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager