Home Warranty of America

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 complaint, and  provide the following...

response.    On June 3, 2017,  the customer opened an Air conditioning claim, stating that one of their two AC systems were not cooling.  We immediately assigned a technician to diagnose the system.     On June 12, 2017, we were advised by the technician that the 32 year old condenser had failed due to age.  As we would have needed to address the upgrade to the 32 year old unit, the customer’s included modification coverage would have allowed for monies to go towards a replacement indoor coil.  The technician believed we were providing the correct coil, but wished to confirm.   On June 15, 2017, the customer requested a cash out and the technician advised he had not received the equipment.  As we were waiting for the information from the technician, we had not yet ordered the replacement equipment.   On June 18, 2017, the customer again requested her cash out (and filed the referenced complaint.)   On June 20, 2017, the vendor confirmed the coil would work, her cash out was confirmed.   On June 21, 2017, we contacted the customer, ad advised of the cash out.  The customer wanted model numbers e-mailed of what we were installing, which the rep could not provide, and the customer requested a supervisor.      A supervisor contacted the customer and left a message.  We have heard nothing back.   So, per their demand, we are waiting on the customer to accept the repair or cash out, we will not pay damages based on the customer’s lack of an air conditioning unit, and the AC systems in the home are eligible under the contract.  We will not take additional responsibility beyond the contractual coverage for their other unit.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

June 22, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] GA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and have received the...

diagnosis of their unit failure.  We are currently reviewing the diagnostic information with the customer.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:HWA may have marked my contract to auto renew, but I CERTAINLY did NOT mark anything to auto renew. I know they don't have any proof of that and could not provide it. They did, in fact, return my money for the renewal that I did not give authorization for, however they kept my money for ten weeks before they returned it. I was told repeatedly that it would be six weeks. I have all of the documented proof of all of this.    In July of 2014 I did indeed file a claim. The reason for filing the claim was because my primary condensation drain line was clogged and water was running out of my secondary condensation line, from the PVC pipe outside my home. I did NOT file a claim for a water leak, as [redacted] states in his response. Air conditioner systems are supposed to leak water from the condensation pans.  HWA people that I talked to on the phone, asked a lot of questions, as always, about the exact nature of my problem. My air conditioner was working fine. The ONLY problem was a clogged drain line and that is what I filed the claim on. Therefore if this problem is not covered in my contact, and is a non-covered maintenance issue, just as [redacted] states, then tell my why they sent a technician out to look at it and charge me $60 to tell me that they don't cover it. HWA should be able to know what they don't cover and they should have told me on the phone that this issue is not covered on my contract. However they did not do that. They are the ones that called the technician out which cost me $60 for nothing.  [redacted] has made two false claims so far in his response. His third concerns the maintenance contract. I was specifically told that if I was to purchase a maintenance contract, that this type of condensation line clog would be covered then, but because I had not purchased one, that it would not be paid for.     This type of business practices is why this company has so many complaints filed against it.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

July 6, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]  MI-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and are processing their...

refund.  As a claim was filed, and a technician advised they could service, we need to make sure no payments are due to the technician for the service, before addressing the customer’s cancellation.     Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 11, 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 complaint, and provide the...

following explanation.   On July 5, 2017, the customer ‘s technician called our office, advising that the customer’s 8 SEER 20+ year old evaporator coil had failed.  As this is eligible under the warranty coverage, we offered the customer the quoted cost of the replacement coil, with labor and tax, less the required trade service fee.  (total $1,211.00)   At that time, the technician quoted our office $1,601.00 as the customer’s cost to replace the condenser, with labor, as well as sheet metal and line modifications. (total $1,601.00)   It would appear that the customer is taking the technician’s written invoice(approximately $3,700), deducting the quoted non covered costs, and  is stating the remainder is due from the warranty.   Per a review of the technician’s invoice, it would appear that the costs in question are approximately $900(with $70 in tax), for LNST, SHT MTL, MISC.  Per our discussion with the technician, the line and sheet metal modifications were non-covered costs under the contract.     The customer accepted our cash out on September 5, 2017, and their check is in process.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

September 21, 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 received the customer’s inquiry, and they are free to...

cancel their coverage.  Per contract section VIII.E:   “If HWA cancels this Contract, or if You cancel this contract after the first 30 days of the Coverage Period, then You shall be entitled to a pro rata refund of the paid Contract fee for the unexpired term, less an administrative fee of the lesser or $30 or 10% of the Contract fee (unless otherwise required by state law), and any actual service costs incurred by HWA.”   The customer will not receive the remaining 8 months balance as a refund.  Any processed refund will be the pro-rated amount of the term, less service fees.   If they still wish to cancel the contract, being aware of that fact,  we will process their cancellation as requested.     Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 16, 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 inquiry, and provide the following response. ...

  On May 2, 2016, the customer ordered a 13 month warranty with our company at a cost of $440.00.   On June 2, 2017, the contract expired.     On July 10, 2017, the customer renewed the contract with a lapse.   Less than three days later, the customer reported an air conditioning failure with one of their two units. We assigned a technician to diagnose the failure,  and per their diagnosis determined that the failure would not have occurred within such a short period of time.   We received the customer’s complaint, reviewed the issue, called them to discuss the review, and they have not called us back.   We are waiting for their return call.     Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 3, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have approved the repair, and paid the technician.   The technician is acquiring the part and should contact the customer to install today.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 28, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] ID-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   On October 21, 2016, we sent a work order to the garage door company, and resent it again today.   The customer does not only receive service when they file a complaint, and we are sorry that they believe that is how the warranty works.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 3, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] Horen NC-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]   Per our warranty contract, section IV.A, the warranty provides coverage...

for:   “Leaks and breaks of water, drain, gas, waste or vent lines, except if caused by freezing or roots - Toilet tanks, bowls and mechanisms (replaced with builder’s standard as necessary), toilet wax ring seals - Instant hot water dispensers - Valves for shower, tub, and diverter angle stops, rinses and gate valves - Permanently installed interior sump pumps (used for storm water only) - Built-in bathtub whirlpool motor and pump assemblies - Stoppages/Clogs, including hydro jetting, in drain and sewer lines up to 125’ from access point. Polybutylene piping is covered up to $1,000 in the aggregate during the Coverage Period. Main line stoppages are only covered if there is a ground level clean out available.”   Per the customer’s request, we have received the report from [redacted] and per the  report, there are no mechanical failures with the plumbing in the customer’s home. There are issues with back pitched piping, due to settlement and the pipes not being properly strapped(which is not eligible under the contract).  There are no leaks or breaks in the lines.   Sincerely,     Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 5, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We thank the customer for their inquiry, and provide the...

following response.    Per contract section I.B.8, the warranty only addresses systems and components that “become inoperative due to normal wear.”   And per I.A.5:   “HWA IS NOT AN AUTHORIZED REPAIR TECHNICIAN and will not actually be performing the repair or replacement of any systems or components.”   Assuming the technician broke the customer’s furnace, we are sorry that the incident occurred.   Home Warranty of America is not the technician, and is not liable for a non-normal wear failure. We require technician’s that provide service have liability insurance, and have provided that information to the customer by e-mail.     We will not facilitate the repair of their furnace, nor will we refund contract fees, based on the customer’s position.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

February 21, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]            MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have...

received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following response.    The customer has made a number of unfounded judgments in his complaint, and rather than address them in detail here, we will state simply that we have waived the fee that he chose to not pay(against the terms of his contract).   We will also cancel his contract, as requested, per the cancelation terms of the coverage.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

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:The company is claiming that the unit failed before or during the alleged lapse of coverage.  They cannot provide me with the exact date the unit failed or started to fail.  They cannot provide me with a reason why it took two weeks to process payment and contribute to a "lapse" I didn't know existed.  They are making assumptions that the unit failed before or during the alleged lapse despite what the contractor they sent to my home told me and your company.  I have documented conversations with that contractor.  The company continues to treat me like a criminal, not a customer.   At this point I am moving forward with other means of resolving 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.   A Refund for the overcharge was issued to my credit card on June 30, 2016. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

October 10, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] FL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received...

the customer’s complaint and would like to respond accordingly.    The warranty requires that we provide a technician to address a repair, and receive their diagnosis,  in order to approve them to perform the work.   We apologize if a technological issue prevented the customer from calling our office on the morning of October 4, 2016.  The customer could have filed a claim online, or called us later, as he did at 1:40 PM, on the same day.   We have requested the customer’s receipt for review, but this in no way guarantees that we will provide any reimbursement for work done outside the contract and without our approval.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Claims Special Handling

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,
Christa [redacted]

Revdex.com:I still feel that this company has the worst system in place I have ever seen in regards to customer service.  We started this whole NO AC situation on July 11th and literally did not get it fixed until August 10th despite repeated calls, emails and major complaining.  There are no supervisors to talk to and whomever you get on the phone cannot physically call someone in their purchasing department to find out why parts are not ordered, etc.  They can only email according to them and wait for responses.  Which either take forever or are completely inaccurate.  I will NEVER use this company again and will tell every single soul I encounter to do the same thing.  We had to spend A MONTH in either hotels and staying with friends and my mother-in-law along with 2 dogs.  They should be investigate for unfair business practices.  They have no problem taking our money but just do not hold up their end when it comes to doing the right thing for the customer in a timely manner.
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 27, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]            MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s rebuttal, and as it basically repeats the opinions of initial statement, there is nothing more for us to add.  As stated, we have waived the fee that he chose to not pay(against the terms of his contract) and we have canceled his contract, as requested, per the cancelation terms of the coverage.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

October 5, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] MD-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Our contract has limitations, like all other contracts. We are not replacing the customer’s microwave that became inoperative, and cannot be repaired in the first 30 days.   If the customer considers that “egregious and unconscionable”, that is his prerogative, but we will not replace his cooktop downdraft fan, that was a known issue on his inspection, or his microwave that cannot be repaired  in the first 30 days.      We consider this issue closed.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager