Home Warranty of America

February 23, 2017   [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 provide the following...

response.    This complaint is referencing two optional coverages the customer added to their contract.   They are:   SEPTIC TANK PUMPING:  INCLUDED: If a stoppage is due to a septic tank back up, then HWA will pump the septic tank one time during the term of the plan. Coverage can only become effective if a septic certification was completed within 90 days prior to close of sale. HWA may require a copy of the certification prior to service dispatch. EXCLUDED: The cost of gaining or finding access to the septic tank - The cost of sewer hook ups - Disposal of waste - Chemical treatments - Tanks – Leach lines - Cess pools - Mechanical pumps/systems.   SEPTIC SYSTEM (Per Tank)/SEWAGE EJECTOR PUMP: INCLUDED: Aerobic pump, jet pump, sewage ejector pump, septic tank and line from house to tank. EXCLUDED: Tile fields and leach beds, leach lines, lateral lines, insufficient capacity, cleanout, pumping (except if purchased under separate option), seepage pits. LIMITATIONS: HWA will pay no more than $500 in the aggregate during the Contract Period.   On August 28, 2014, the customer opened a septic/sewage ejector claim, stating their pump was not working and the alarm went off.  We immediately assigned a technician to diagnose the system, who reported that the system tank was full, with a seized ejector pump motor.  The motor replacement repair was below the $500.00 cap.  The customer was charged $120.00 for waste disposal, which is excluded from our coverage.  They approved the non-covered costs, and the clam was completed.     On February 5, 2017, the customer filed the following septic claim online:   “Covered Item Problem: Pump is making a humming noise Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: To[redacted] Problem Description: Sewer pump alarm came on. Don't know why. Need someone to come out ASAP to fix it.”   We immediately assigned a technician to diagnose the system, who found the customer’s aerator pump burnt out.  The aerator pump costs more than the customer’s $500.00 cap, so the customer was charged the difference in cost ($690.00, plus their $60.00 trade fee, which equals their $750.00 demand.)   So, to address the customer’s allegations directly:   The repairs in 2014 and 2017 were totally different failures within the septic system. The customer paid $120.00 for waste disposal, beyond their trade fee in 2014. The customer is responsible for the $690.00 non-covered cost (over the cap), in addition to their $60.00 trade fee.    We are sorry that a long standing customer would file this incorrect complaint publically, rather than address this issue with us directly.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

October 17, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] TN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer is addressing two different claims, and we will...

respond individually.   To address the refrigerator issue, they state:   “The day we moved into our new home we discovered a hole in the side-by-side refrigerator that went all the way through to the freezer portion of the appliance.”    Beyond this, the refrigerator was missing two components ( air loom, damper control).   The warranty, per section I.B.7, requires that systems and components be in proper working order on the coverage period start date. The customer’s refrigerator was not, due to a hole in the unit, and multiple missing parts.  The technician advised us that the unit could be repaired and as a courtesy to the customer and their representation, we did so.    At no point were we told that the unit had would be repaired with duct tape, and as that is not a proper repair, we would not address the unit that never worked properly under contract..   The customer’s 14 year old water heater is leaking, and is eligible under contract.   The warranty would not provide an expansion tank (which is not currently in the customers home), a pressure regulator valve (which is not currently in the customers home), a mixing valve (which is not currently in the customers home),  or modifications to the existing water and gas lines, that have not failed, in the customer’s home.   If the customer does not wish to pay these non covered costs, we can provide them a check for $685.00, as our cost for the water heater, the labor to install the water heater and the disposal of the old unit.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/03) */
August 3, 2015
Esther [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
Revdex.com
330 North Wabash, Suite 2006
Chicago, IL 60611
Re: 94562044: Henderson TX-1842280
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
When the customer's contract was opened...

electronically with our Company, the person who opened it outside our Company provided an incorrect start date for the Contract. When the customer called us on Saturday July 18, 2015, to file her Air Conditioning claim, we needed supporting documentation to change the date that was provided(the date provided prevented the claim from being filed). The customer provided the documentation, and we filed the claim.
The customer's unit was serviced the day this complaint was filed, and though we have called the customer to confirm the service, they have not responded.
We are sorry for the delay, and hope the issue was addressed.
If you should have any questions or concerns, I can be reached at extension [redacted].
Sincerely,
Carl [redacted]
Escalated Special Handling
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/08/07) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I hadn't responded because I was out of the country. The problem was solved, but we were told an entirely different story in regards to the process and how to get the problem corrected. If we had been informed of how to properly resolve the issue, we would not have spend a week in a hot house.

January 21, 2016 Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]  SC-2165710 Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s...

complaint and are providing the following response. The Customer purchased our Contract at the closing of his property on December 4, 2015, and moved into the property on January 6, 2015. On January 8, 2016, the customer called and advised that two days prior, they noticed the kitchen refrigerator not working at the time they moved in. The claim was processed, and we assigned a technician to diagnose  the unit. On January 12, 2016, the technician reported that the 7 year old unit was leaking internally, with a failed compressor.  Per our contract, Section I.A.2: “Malfunctions which existed on the Coverage Period Start Date will be covered only if the malfunction was unknown and could not have been detectable by visual inspection or simple mechanical test.” As the unit had never worked properly under the Contract, we had requested the customer’s inspection, to determine if an issue with the water heater was known or was detectable by visual inspection or mechanical test. Per the inspection document, it states that the refrigerator was not inspected.  As the unit never worked properly, per the customer, and the issue could have been noticed by visual inspection or mechanical test, as it was when the customer moved in. we declined to provide coverage for the refrigerator that never worked properly under contract. As a courtesy, we have offered to refund the customer’s trade service fee, which was accepted.    Sincerely, Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

July 11, 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...

provide the following response. Per our agreement, section 3.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).”   We attempted to arrange same day service for the customer.  Unfortunately, there were no technicians available.  This does not mean that the warranty is liable for the overtime charge the technician assessed the customer for weekend service, or his additional costs for refrigerant.     Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 26, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: 11616991: [redacted] AZ-2286497   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Again, the customer is disregarding the root issue, that his heater never worked properly under the contract, behind a smokescreen of complaints (not relevant to the issue), claims of unethical business practices(unsupported), and unsubstantiated statements about covering his heater, which was never requested or approved.   Contractually, we will investigate an issue that the customer states never worked properly, because it is  still eligible under the contract.   If we determine that the unit never worked properly under the contract, and the problem would have been detectable under visual inspection or mechanical test on the coverage period start date, then we would not address the issue.   We consider this matter closed.     Sincerely,   Carl Hewelt DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

December 20, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]) IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We are sincerely sorry for the delays in...

completing the customer’s replacement caused by the manufacturer being out of the needed unit, and the delay in shipping the needed replacement.    The replacement could have been done on the 18th, and was completed on the 19th, at the customer’s request.     Sincerely,   [redacted] Office of the President

August 2, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted] PA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and have contacted them, to...

provide the requested offer.   We are waiting to hear back from them to resolve the issue.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 4, 2016   [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 complaint and as of yesterday, the...

unit was available for pickup and installation by the technician.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: 1. Although a customer service rep. contacted me regarding the refrigerator claim, she explained ot me that HWA could no longer source a certified sub zero service company to repair my unit, that I would have to do that on my own, then have another evaluation done (my third one so far) and have that service provider call into HWA to obtain approval by HWA to repair my refrigerator. So, I did find one provider (took me 2 minutes on-line) and made those arrangements. All HWA did was shift the responsibility to me to find a provider, and arrange all of the logistics to get this unit fixed, despite HWA having sent two of their own certified providers? Who runs a business like this?  I have made those arrangements and will work the process, but I will not consider the claim resolved until the refrigerator is repaired and paid for under my HWA homeowners warranty.  Additionally, I inquired about my open claim on my microwave oven, which claim was processed the same day as my refrigerator claim (July 5, 2016) which is supposedly in the hands of the "options" department for final determination on resolution? It's a microwave, it's broken, two technicians confirmed it - really, what else is needed? 
Sincerely,
Richard [redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I had to pay $30 after I asked them not to renew. I should not be responsible for paying my bank when I asked them not to take the money and it took so long for them to refund.
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.
The local personnel I came in contact with made this issue go away. I hope in the future to deal with them instead of having to wait the excessive wait times for your normal line. If you could hire more people like the one I worked with locally, things would have gone a lot smoother. The AC was installed correctly and working at this time.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

November 20, 2015Lucille [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MN-1024134Dear Ms. [redacted]:We have received the
customer’s complaint and this...

issue was resolved with them directly as of yesterday.
 Sincerely,Carl [redacted]Escalated Special Handling

August 4, 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 contacted them...

directly to confirm the approval and part order.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

September 1, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: 11672158: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following...

response.   On July 2, 2016, the customer filed a claim with our office, for their Garage door system.   On July 5, 2016, we reassigned the technician, after the first tech could not service.   On July 11, 2016, we approved the technician to replace the garage door system.   Forty three days later, the customer called our office, and complained that the vendor misinformed him about the number of remotes that came with the opener.   Per our contract, section  VII.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.”   We are sorry that the customer was misinformed about the number of remotes, if that occurred, but we are not liable for refunding the customer the fee paid to the technician, nor can we have the technician return an opener that has been used for forty three days.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

June 16, 2016   [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 rebuttal, and provide the following response.   There is no addendum needed, nor does the customer need a confirmation letter.   We have advised the customer of her refund on a recorded line. If she provides her documentation, we will provide the stated reimbursement.     Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  The warranty company is not covering the full cost of the replacement as they claim there are "modifications" and there are no modifications, only the replacement of the covered item.   They have their own definition of modifications which is not contractually defined and any payment over my contractual $100 deductible is unacceptable.   I see this as a fraudulent way of doing business.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

August 17, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] Johnson GA[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and the equipment should...

be in the technician’s possession shortly, to complete the repair.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

May 11, 2017   [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 complaint, and  have approved repairs to the...

unit on January 20, March 22, and On May 8, 2017.    The customer has told our office that he wants the unit replaced, but without a diagnosis stating that need to be done, we will not replace the unit.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

April 18, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: Rao TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and provide the following response. ...

  On November 8, 2016, the  customer’s title company ordered a single warranty contract for two connected, but separate properties (at no point was this mentioned by title as a duplex, but six weeks later, the customer called looking for duplex pricing)   In January, 2017, the customer filed five claims, looking at failures at both property locations.   In February, 2017, it was determined that this was two separate properties, and we added the duplex coverage to the contract, requiring the customer to pay for the addition( as they had filed claims on both locations)  (Please note: the customer was never charged for this coverage, as they stated they only wished coverage to continue on a single location. )   In March 2017, the customer wanted the duplex coverage, and blamed the title company for not correctly processing the initial order  (he seemed confused,  thinking that the warranty was going to cover the contract payment for one of the units.). To our knowledge, the title company was sending us a check.   In April, 2017, the customer inquired about cancellation and then the check sent by title for the duplex coverage, which he then stated he no longer wants.  We are prepared to return the check to title when it is received.   The trade fee in question was addressed the day the claim was filed.   If the customer is looking to cancel the full contract, he can contact us directly, and the coverage will be cancelled per the contracts specifications.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling