Home Warranty of America

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The claims that they are making are not truthful or accurate. I have been using kitchen faucets my entire life and this has never happened to me before. This was just normal wear and tear. I called the technician and he told me that he was unsure what the problem was but it would be easiest just to replace the faucet. How would the technician know if the cartridge was broken if he didn't even take it apart? it could have been a: worn out O ring, Corroded valve seat, worn out washer, worn out seals or a number of other issues. The faucet was never disassembled and properly diagnosed. I had gusts in town this weekend so I didn't have time to wait around to wash my dishes.
Sincerely,
Dr[redacted]

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
HWA assigned my dishwasher issue to vendor Randy [redacted] and have not received a call from him at all. Dishwasher is still not fixed. I am totally disabled and under The Disability Act have had to pay to have dishes cleaned since issue happened. Received a call from Carl [redacted] from HWA who is their Escalated Special Handling stating they will fix it yet still not fixed. This has been going on since 10/1/2015. Will seek an attorney if needed.

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 with regard to the hot water tank.   
Sincerely,
[redacted]

July 26, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] TN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The warranty will not replace or upgrade equipment that has not failed.  The customer’s argument that we need to upgrade his equipment for the system to work is not correct.  The condenser needs to be upgraded, but it has not failed.   As our contract states, we are addressing/upgrading his failed air handler, but not the condenser.   The referenced modification coverage does not include a replacement condenser.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 24, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] : [redacted] LA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and have contacted them...

with the dishwasher options.     Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: once again, you have not fulfilled your contract as stated. It took repeated phone calls and 9 days to have appliance looked at on my end. You have accepted money and not done what you have stated in your contract what you should have done. Pay the consumer back, you are completely in the wrong and maintain the typical corporate America garbage.
Sincerely,
Richard [redacted]

July 15, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: Aponte  LA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and this issue was...

resolved with the customer the day this complaint was filed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

November 29, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] OH-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer’s contract states we will dispatch a service request to an Authorized Repair Technician in 48 hours. It does not say we will dispatch a vendor in 48 hours.    The customer statement that we did not make reasonable efforts to secure a vendor is blatantly false.   The customer stated his basement was flooding when he advised us of the claim.   We are not responsible, per contract, for a customer’s property damage, or damage caused because an eligible item doesn’t work.    We have read the customer’s correspondence, and even though we know his insurance is not addressing the damage, that does not change the offer that was made previously.   We communicated clearly with this customer, his claim for damaged property is not legitimate, and he reported his failure with his sump pump as his basement was flooding, providing us no time to address the failure of his sump pump.   We are not paying the customer’s damages and consider this matter closed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 25, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] NC-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and the issue was...

resolved on August 22, 2016   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

March 29, 2018     Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] PA-2790401     Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received the customer’s inquiry, and...

provide the following response.  The customer, as stated, filed 3 Heating claims on their contract which began January 12, 2017:   On February 22, 2017, the customer advised that their heating system, which had been running for two weeks, was leaking and not heating.  Per our agreement, we sent a technician to the property, who advised that the unit appeared to have been recently improperly repaired (per the technician, a new relief valve of improper material was leaking, and the contractually excluded flue damper was sticking closed). This improper repair would not be covered under contract and the customer was advised.    On November 17, 2017, the customer called back, advising that the heating system was making a loud buzzing noise, and was not heating the home.  At that time, we assigned a technician to diagnose the reported failure, and when they did not respond to the customer, we reassigned the service.  On January 3, 2018, we received an online update, stating that an aquastat was changed out for the customer, but the technician never charged us for the repair.   On March 20, 2018, the customer called our office, again reporting that the unit was not heating the home.   We assigned a technician, and at the customer’s request, reassigned to another technician that could service the same day.   On March 22, 2018 (the day the complaint was filed), we were advised that the aquastat had been tampered with, and that was preventing the unit from heating properly.  The technician advised that the aquastat was not new, and had just been improperly repaired.  We contacted the initial technician to confirm what had been done but they refused to provide the information.  The customer believes it might be a zone controller valve issue and we have sent a technician, with no fee due, to re-evaluate the situation. The service is scheduled for Saturday.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] Office of the President

January 18, 2016 Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: [redacted] WI-2197417 Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s response. The customer has not provided the requested information from the inspection of the unit.  We are not looking for what he states the inspector informed him of. The technician that inspected his unit found signs of long term leakage.  We did not state the customer reported leakage in our initial response.. We have no information about the customers allegations of misrepresentation by the real estate agency, nor does the customer support this allegation.  We also have an established history of covering claims, and the funds to do so.  It would seem that the customer is looking at 3rd party websites, which show either unverified customer complaints, or complaints that we have addressed.  They do not show the hundreds of thousands of covered claims, because people do not complain about them. The customer alleges that the diagnosis of the unit created a dangerous situation, but their inspection from prior to closing, advises that the unit was a safety hazard before the technician even came to the home.. The technician calls our office to provide their diagnosis of the unit, which they did.  We did not hang up on the technician.  It is not the customer’s prerogative to advise our office when we have the information needed to decide whether a claim is covered.   Per the technician, it is a safety issue for the venting to be installed through the side of the house for a conventional heater.  The vent should have been installed through the roof.  From no demand, the customer  is now demanding the cost of a replacement unit, a refund of his ‘tip’ to the technician, and an apology.  We have made our only offer in reference to this issue, and consider it closed, unless he provides the remainder of the inspection document, or a request to Cancel the Contract that he claims was misrepresented. Sincerely, Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

July 26, 2016   [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 received their...

cancellation request on July 6, 2016.   Their request is in process.     Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

May 5, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: [redacted] LA-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s complaint and have addressed the issue directly with the...

customer and technician. Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

From: [redacted], Carl [mailto:c[redacted]@hwahomewarranty.com] Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 3:53 PM To: Esther [redacted] <e[redacted]@chicago.Revdex.com.org> Subject: 94573070   (esther-your site is still down, preventing me from posting the below response before the due date-here it is) October 29, 2015 Esther [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: 94573070: Smith AZ-105308 Dear Ms. [redacted]: We received the customer’s rebuttal, and are providing the following response. After speaking with the technician and the customer, and learning of  a disagreement between them, we offered the customer two options to address the dishwasher issue: •       the option of a cash out to repair/purchase a new unit •       assigning a different technician to diagnose/repair the existing unit. The customer desires the unit to be repaired, or replaced if necessary, so we have assigned a new technician that works om [redacted] dishwashers. They have provided the diagnosis, are ordering the motor to repair the unit, and we have approved the repair. Sincerely, Carl [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

August 8, 2016   Lucille [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  Bledsoe IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and have contacted...

them today with an update on both claims.   Sincerely,   Carl [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 13, 2016   Lucille [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.   The customer was looking for same day service, to address their leaking water heater.   They were given the option to get their own technician.  They didn’t realize that they would have had to pay for the unit in full, and then receive reimbursement.   They declined that option.    The water heater was replaced under warranty, two days later.   Sincerely,   Carl [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] IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the cus[redacted]er’s message, and provide the following response.  ...

On the morning of June 19, 2017, the following events occurred: (Please note-because the events occurred within a relatively short time period, some information was not addressed by other departments before new information was provided.)   (9:28 AM CST), The cus[redacted]er contacted our office, to file a claim for a leaking AC unit.  Per our contract, we assigned a technician to diagnose the failure. (10:05 AM CST) The cus[redacted]er called back, stating that the neighboring unit was being damaged by the leakage and was requesting a technician service as quickly as possible (10:47 AM CST) A new technician was assigned, that could confirm service in two days. (10:57 AM CST) The cus[redacted]er called back wanting same day service, and we attempted to assign a technician that could do so. (1:05PM CST) The cus[redacted]er spoke to a supervisor , who advised that we were still trying to arrange a technician to address the issue and (mistakenly) advised her that additional costs would be owed for the emergency service. (1:07 PM CST) The cus[redacted]er e-mailed our special handling department (that they had interacted with on a prior claim), and had been advised they could contact their own technician.   We advised the cus[redacted]er that the technician would need to contact us with a diagnosis and the warranty would reimburse based on eligibility/our cost. (5:20 PM CST)  The cus[redacted]er’s technician called our office and advised that they had been to the cus[redacted]er’s  home three weeks prior to perform maintenance.  At that time they added refrigerant to the cus[redacted]er’s system, and as the unit was again low on refrigerant, with a freezing coil, that the technician believed had a substantial evaporator coil leak(this is the mechanical failure with the unit).  The technician quoted a flat rate cost on the entire system replacement, and we asked for further specifics and a cost breakdown.   The following day, the cus[redacted]er’s vendor  was sent a replacement form from our office, to provide us all the needed costs and specifics.   On June 23, 2017, we received an incomplete copy of the replacement form.   On June 26, June 29, July 1, July 4, we contacted the technician looking for updated information.    On July 5, 2017, the cus[redacted]er emailed our office, looking for the issue to be resolved.  We had received an e-mail from the technician, which provided most of the information needed, but still needed to speak to him directly.    On July 6, 2017, after speaking to the cus[redacted]er, I personally called her technician, determined that the evaporator coil had failed, confirmed the price for the replacement coil (with the rest of our costs), and offered that as a payment to the cus[redacted]er.  I confirmed that the technician could complete the rest of the replacement as of Monday, but would not pay for the upgraded equipment that the cus[redacted]er needs to work with the new coil.   (Please note, this is what the cus[redacted]er is now demanding.) The cus[redacted]er accepted our offer.   Since then, the cus[redacted]er has been filing complaints on social media, like this one, disputing our payment for her failed coil, and wanting additional funds.    We will not pay her an additional $1,500 to upgrade her working R22 condenser to a R410A condenser, as this type of system upgrade of a functional piece of equipment is not included in our warranty.    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.
However, the contract states that "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..."I logged in to the website and tried to file a claim around 8:00 PM pm 05/11/2016 because our air conditioner started making loud, grinding noises. The website responded with a message along the lines of "Sorry we are not able to process your request right now...". I then called the phone number above twice and simply got a recorded message. I expected a live person--perhaps HWA should be more up front about 24 hours phone service means leaving a voice mail after a certain time of day. I did leave a message and no one ever followed up or returned my call. I called later the next day (05/12) and finally spoke with someone. The service call was resolved today, 05/14.I initially requested $1,000 compensation to cover a refund of the annual contract of $530 and an estimated amount for the repair that was required (which would likely be higher).
Sincerely,
[redacted]

November 20, 2015[redacted] Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611Re: File Number:[redacted] Bauer
[redacted]Dear Ms. Beltran, We received the customer’s
rebuttal and would like to respond accordingly.  Per their initial complaint,
the customer states:“February 4, 2015 I signed
papers to terminate my contract with Direct Energy Home Warranty for a service
contract.”These papers were not signed
with us, and we never received them. The customer stating ‘they’
in her rebuttal is claiming that the third party resent the documentation,
claiming  that it was sent in February.We never received it from
them, and as such, the Contract was not cancelled per the procedures specified
in our Contract. The customer never contacted
us in February, March, April, May, June or July.  Had they done so, per our agreement, we would
have addressed their request to cancel at that time.  We do not owe the customer a refund,
as they never cancelled the Contract. They signed a document, and gave it to a
third party, which never was received by us. Sincerely,Carl HeweltEscalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Reason #1 - The May 2015 call was not to file a claim for our pool.  The May 2015 call was to verify as to whether or not our pool was part of our current coverage at that time so that it could be added in August when we renewed.  We did not have any issues with our pool in 2015.Reason #2 - I also included in my complaint the information about HWA stating we could find our own technician to do the work.  The problem is that HWA will not commit to reimbursing for that work unless the technician meets their criteria (bonded and insured).  How can we find a technician in our area to help with this if HWA does not have a technician in our area that meets their approval?  IT'S SIMPLE!!!  HWA CANNOT PROVIDE A SERVICE THEY CONTRACTED WITH US FOR AND CONTINUE TO TAKE OUR PREMIUM AND DO NOTHING TO FULFILL THEIR END OF THE CONTRACT.  THIS IS ILLEGAL.Reason #3 - We are still out $150 for the pool coverage that HWA cannot provide service for that is written into our contract.Reason #4 - Let it be known that HWA just debited our account for August payment so continue to take our money.  Please add reimbursement for pool coverage to the month of August 2016, as well.My next step will be the insurance commission at which time I will seek counsel to secure the recorded phone conversations between my husband, myself, and HWA customer service.  At that point, I will be seeking reimbursement for all expenses and whatever else my attorney recommends.
Sincerely,
Amy [redacted]