Home Warranty of America

August 19, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and are moving forward...

with addressing the AC issue.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 25, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] FL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and have no...

information on why the customer feels we are trying to stall his claim.   We received the breakdown on his repair on the day this complaint was filed, and we have already confirmed the repair with him directly.      Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

October 4, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] NV-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer did not request to [redacted] the direct to consumer...

contract they purchased, on September 6, 2017.  They did so when they called our office on October 4, 2017, the day the second payment was requested from their account, as previously arranged.   Their [redacted]lation is in process, per their October request.   Since[redacted],     [redacted] Office of the President

August 8, 2017     [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611     Re: [redacted]: [redacted] AL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s inquiry, and their repair was...

approved July 31, 2017.    We apologize for any confusion or delay in completing the repair.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

May 12,  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 provide the following response. On...

April 13, 2016, the customer purchased a 13 month home warranty with our company. On May 1, 2016, they filed the following claim online: “Covered Item Problem: No Power To Part Of The Home Has this item ever worked?: Yes When did you first notice the problem?: Today Have you moved into the home?: Yes When did you move into the home?: 04/16/2016 Problem Description: Power to my kid's room and 3rd bedroom went out.  About 30 mins later power comes back but is blinking rapidly in both of the rooms.  After about a minute of blinking the lights stopped working.  About another 30 mins later the 3rd bedroom light now controls(on & off) not only that room's light, but also my kid's room, hallway nightlight plugged in, and the hallway light??  If you turn on the master bedroom light and the 3rd bedroom light at the same time the lights blink rapidly. thanks in advance, [redacted] J” We immediately assigned a technician to review the issue, and received their diagnosis on May 9, 2016.  On May 5, 2016,  the technician visited the customer’s home and found  four feed/circuits on a single  neutral, which is an improper install/repair from the Main panel to half of the house. Additionally, there was an improperly sized breaker in the main panel, with open and improper wiring. Per our contract, section I.B.7: ““Covered Systems and Components” means 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. Components shall be considered in proper working order if no defect is known or would have been detectable by a visual inspection or mechanical test on the Coverage Period Start Date.” As these failures were visually apparent to the technician inspecting the electrical failure, we requested the customer’s home inspection, to confirm the electrical system was in proper working order. Per the inspection, the main panel was marked Repair/replace, which is defined as: “The item, component or unit is not functioning as intended, or needs further inspection by a qualified contractor. Items, components or units that can be repaired to satisfactory condition may not need replacement.” With the following statements referencing electrical problems in the home: “Double tap is present at breaker. This circuit needs to be moved to it's own circuit breaker and cannot share a breaker. It is recommended that a qualified electrician separate the two circuits and properly connect each circuit to it's own individual breaker.” “Breaker panel should have 20% free space for additional breakers, Evaluation by a licensed electrician is recommended” “The main panel has circuit breakers that need labels identifying their location(s).” “The left receptacle at the outlet to the left of the fireplace does not have power. No switch was located to power up this receptacle.” “Missing outlet cover plate at the outlet inside the kitchen cabinet. I suggest removing outlet and covering with a blank plate.” “Light fixture in the laundry room is not functioning.” “Non GFCI outlets in the garage, recommend replacement by a licensed electrician.” “Non GFCI outlets in the laundry room area, recommend replacement by a licensed electrician.” “Smoke detectors are required 1 per floor within 15 feet of any bedroom and within 6 feet of any furnace or boiler and water heater. Recommend installation of combination smoke/carbon monoxide detectors hard wired to electrical panel.” We contacted the customer to confirm the failures noted by the inspector were addressed, and he stated that they were.  We requested the proof of repair, and the customer could not verify that the repairs were completed.  He only had a letter stating that they were. A visual inspection or mechanical test performed on the coverage period start date would have detected these electrical problems, as the problems were by the inspector before and a service technician after closing.  We would not address the electrical system that was not in proper working order, Sincerely, [redacted]
DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

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]

September 12, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   As stated, we have processed the $371.50 refund on August 29, 2016.  The customer should be seeing this check shortly.   Stating we have not told him about this refund, is incorrect, as we have responded here advising of this payment   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

January 11, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] : [redacted] PA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Per contract section VII.I:   “HWA has the sole right to determine whether...

a covered appliance, system or component will be repaired or replaced…”   Additionally, per contract section VII.H:   “HWA IS NOT LIABLE FOR INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR ECONOMIC DAMAGES FOR LOSS OR DAMAGES TO ANY PERSON OR PROPERTY ARISING FROM THE LOSS OF USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE EQUIPMENT TO THE EXTENT SUCH MAY BE DISCLAIMED BY LAW, AND YOU EXPRESSLY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO ALL SUCH DAMAGES.”   So, we will not replace the customer’s appliance, that per all information we have been provided, can be repaired (and will be on the morning of January 13, 2016), nor will we address any perceived financial loss from the customer, because he could not use the refrigerator.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

November 19, 2015Lucille [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611Re:[redacted]: [redacted]  AL-[redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:We have received the
customer’s complaint. Per...

his request written and verbal requests, we have
forwarded his requests to cancel the Contract to the correct department, and
they are processing his request, per section VIII.E of the Contract.“…if the Contract is
cancelled, the Home Owner shall be entitled to a pro rata refund of the paid
Contract fee for the unexpired term, less service and a $25 administrative cost
incurred by HWA.”As the customer has used 10
months of coverage, with 3 remaining, and the warranty has covered over $300.00
in repairs on the customer’s behalf, (making his statement “They never want to
fix anything” incorrect), there would be no funds remaining to refund.Sincerely,Carl [redacted]Escalated Special Handling

July 19, 2017   [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 inquiry and have been advised that the part was...

delivered to the technician today, and should be installed as soon as the customer/technician schedule the installation.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 25, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Per a conversation with our office on October 18, 2016, the customer did not wish to cancel.  If she has changed her mind, we will cancel the contract, per Contract section VIII.E.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I have not recieved a refund for my renewal.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

June 19, 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 have left messages the day before...

and the day after it was filed, to address the requested cash out option.  We are waiting for the customer's response.    Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

August 15, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Since the customer is looking for the cash out amount, that has been calculated, and a message left for them to address.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

February 19, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted] TN-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s complaint...

and are providing the following response. On October 22, 2015, the customer noticed severe water dama** to their kitchen.  A claim was filed to address their plumbing. The following day, the plumber traced the problem to their dishwasher.  A new claim was filed, with no fee due, to address the eligible dishwasher. On October 24, 2015, it was determined that the 20+ year old unit had a cracked pump and motor.  The part was no longer available, so we approved the unit to be replaced. On October 25, 2015, we determined the replacement offer: ·         ‘** DISHWASHER M# [redacted] ·          or a cash out of our cost on the unit in the amount of $415.00 We advised the customer of the offer the following day. On October 28, 2015, the customer requested information on an upgrade of the unit.  We determined the upgrade cost, and advised the customer.  He declined the upgrade, and accepted the offered replacement unit. The unit was ordered on October 29, 2015, and was expected to be delivered between November 8 and November 10, 2015.  The customer was upset by this fact, but as he had issues with the restoration of his kitchen cabinets and floors, this was not an issue. In January, the customer contacted us in reference to the installation of the unit, which could not have been done, due to  the delays in replacement of his cabinets and floors. We offered our cost on the installation of the unit. On February 16, the customer called and advised he could not find someone to install the unit, so we assigned a technician. He then called back stating that the unit we offered, he approved, and we provided was not to his liking.  (He stated it was too small.)  We offered to take it back, and send him a check, less the restocking fees (that he was informed of when he accepted the unit), His response was a legal threat.  We have provided the customer a replacement dishwasher, as well as a technician to install it, and he approved the replacement provided. Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

May 25, 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 rebuttal, and  provide the following response:   Again, as stated, we do not reimburse the customer for work done outside the contract and without our approval.  We did not approve the customer to replace his unit, and we will not pay him for the unit he replaced.   We are sorry for his dissatisfaction, but we will not allow a customer to replace any appliance or system outside the contract that they choose, and then publicly demand that we pay for their purchase, because they feel it is the correct course of action.   We consider this issue closed.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: if january and febuary were processed as said why have they not been receive in my account! Not to mention what was marchs deduction for if the account was closed? WORDS are cheap refunds are when the money shows as a refund in my checking account.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The vendor highbred by HWA[redacted] A/C) has told me on two separate occasions that their analysis, and professional suggestion to HWA was to replace the unit. This is their vendor not mine. However, because Home Warranty of America is a scam, and would rather steal $500 for honest hard working people like me, they've decided that I should have to pay an additional $2,300 to repair a unit that I can replace out of pocket for $3500. They are claiming that I need to pay for, "modifications" which mean that they aren't taking responsibility. By their logic, because my unit is older, my warranty is void, and I should have to pay for nearly the entirety of any repairs. This is the reason that their google ratings are 2.1 out of 5 stars. They least they could do is refund my $500, since they haven't done anything to help me with items covered under my, warranty. That would mean however, that they aren't criminally ripping people off. They realize that for most people, it's not worth the time, aggravation, or cost(with legal representation) to fight them. To recap:Home Warranty of America ignored the advice of their own vendor for replacement.HWA ignored me, didn't return voicemails, and lied to me constantly about what they were doing.HWA also breeched their own contract: General Covered Provisions, Section 111(Service Calls) part B reads, "HWA will dispatch Service Requests to an Authorized Repair technician with in 48 hours". It took 6 days get someone out to my home. When I called and asked HWA when someone would be out, I was told they contacted the vendor and I would have to speak to them. I called the vendor and was told they hadn't received anything for my account from HWA. This is very typical of Home Warranty of America. This had easily been the worst experience I've ever had as a consumer, I would have happily helped with the cost for a replacement unit, the money was never the issue. Its the principle of being lied to to, ignored, and taken advantage of. If anyone reads this please head my warning, DO NOT USE HOME WARRANTY OF AMERICA.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

May 9, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted] FL-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s complaint and are providing the following response. The...

customer has had a contract with us since November 29, 2015. We have paid approximately $500.00 over the course of seven claims under the contract. The customer has proposed a course of action, in reference to receiving reimbursement for a storm water gutter drainage failure, that he filed as a plumbing claim.  As this is not a failure that is eligible under our contract, as the contract specifically excludes gutters and drains in reference to the optional roof leak repair coverage,  we will not provide reimbursement. (Not only does the customer not have this optional coverage, but it is a contract exclusion.)    Since we decline to reimburse for the non-eligible issue, he is requesting a full refund of his contract cost, incorrectly claiming that we have breached the contract. Even if this claim was correct, the customer would only be entitled to a pro-rated refund, lest costs paid on his behalf and fees.  Since we have paid more than the cost of the contract in covered claims, there are no funds to reimburse.   He states that he is now intending to dispute his payment with his credit card company, over claims of false advertising, on an almost 6 month old contract, that has more than paid for itself in coverage.  We will wait for them to contact us, in reference to the issue. Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

September 2, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] IN-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer’s reimbursement was processed on August 29, 2016....

  Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager