Home Warranty of America

August 18, 2016 Lucille [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: Boyle IL-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s complaint and provide the following response....

 On July 7, 2016, the customer opened a 13 month warranty with our company.  On July 9, 2016, they moved into the property On July 11, 2016, they noticed a failure with the dryer, after using it twice.  Per contract, we sent a technician to investigate the failure, and they found that the timer failed on the 26 year old unit. (Please note, this part is no longer available) We requested the customer’s inspection, and other  supporting documentation.  When this was received, we reviewed the information and confirmed the unit was in proper working order.  Per contract Section VII.I: “for the first 30 days of the Home Owner’s Coverage Period, HWA is not liable for replacement of entire systems or appliances due to obsolete, discontinued or unavailability of one or more integral parts. However, HWA will provide reimbursement for the costs of those parts determined by reasonable allowance for the fair value of similar parts.” We have provided the customer a check for the cost of the timer.  Sincerely, Car[redacted]DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 2, 2017   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] FL-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The customer was explained the procedure to contact their own vendor, requiring that their technician contact us with the diagnosis and that, if eligible, the warranty would provide reimbursement based on our costs.  This procedure was not followed.   We are offering to review their invoice ,to see if any reimbursement can be provided, and again request the customer provide it.    In either case, the customer will not be provided a full refund of the cost of the warranty, based on prior service provided (reference VII.E).   Sincerely,     [redacted] Office of the President

November 30, 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 as they stated, they have...

previously reviewed this issue with my office.   The customer refuses to acknowledge that a visual inspection or mechanical test of the exchanger, performed four days before his technician’s maintenance visit (which would have been the coverage period start date) would have discovered the failure.  The unit was not in proper working order on the coverage period start date.   This is why the issue is not, and will not be, covered under contract.  We have offered the customer a partial refund of his contract cost, and that is our only offer.       Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:  The business has not offered to resolve the dispute as I requested in my Revdex.com complaint.  I requested that HWA refund my deductible fee of $65 as compensation for the work day (and corresponding pay) I missed when I took off work to wait for the second vendor who never arrived.  I also requested that HWA cover all of my selected vendor's costs, without exclusions, because of how long HWA has taken to address this matter. I received a phone call today, October 19, 2017, from Ms. [redacted] notifying me that HWA would only cover the cost to replace the drain pipe but would not cover the cost of the pop-up assembly because HWA considers the pop-up assembly a "drainage mechanism."  Ms. [redacted] informed me she was reading directly from the contract and "drainage mechanism[s]" are excluded.  However, HWA's contract does not define "drainage mechanism" as meaning a pop-up assembly.  Also, I am unable to locate the portion of the contract Ms. [redacted] was quoting because a reading of my contract qualifies drain mechanisms to bath tubs, not sinks.  Finally, a complete repair to the drain pipe cannot be properly effected without also replacing the pop-up assembly.  For the reasons noted above, I again request that HWA cover my selected vendor's entire costs, without exclusion.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

November 17, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] MA-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the complaint and provide the following response.  ...

The customer’s hot water boiler failed. Per section V.A of our contract:   “During the period of Home Owner’s coverage, HWA will pay no more than $1,500 per covered item for diagnosis, access, and repair or replacement of any hot water or steam circulating heating systems or glycol system, or geothermal/water source heat pump.”   The check was accepted and processed. Unfortunately it was sent to the customer’s old address.  We are waiting for the check to be returned and/or voided, before we can express a new check to them.  They are fully aware of this situation, and are aware we are expressing this check as soon as we are able. We apologize for the delay, but we cannot expedite the issue more than that.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

March 30, 2016   [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 rebuttal, and will provide the full explanation of her two air conditioning issues , dating back to December 2016.   On December 25, 2016, at 9:17 PM CST,  the customer reported the following Air conditioning claim:   “Covered Item Problem: Straight Air Conditioner - used in air conditioning season only When did you first notice the problem?: Today Q & A: Q: Has the air conditioner ever worked properly for you A: Yes Q: Please Tell us the nature of the problem you are experiencing A: Everything is on and running but we are getting very little cooling Q: Please tell us how the air conditioner worked for you previous to this problem A: No problems Q: Have you had maintenance performed on the system A: No Q: How many units do you have A: Two Q: Please tell us which part of the home is not cooling A: Downstairs Q: Please tell us how long the unit has been running properly for this season. A: More than 2 Months Problem Description: Fan is blowing air but not very cool”   Per our contractual agreement, we assigned a technician, to diagnose the reported failure.   On December 28, 2016, we received the following diagnosis:   ‘The customer’s 21 year old AC unit  was low on refrigerant.  The technician  did an electronic leak check, and found multiple non-repairable leaks in condenser coil.  The Evaporator  coil is 410a compatible, but unit needs to be leveled & rehung with proper strapping, and must modify drain.’   We received the technician’s breakdown of covered costs to replace the condenser, as well as the non covered modification costs to complete the install, and rehang the coil.  Per contract section V.C, and section VII.J:   “Except as noted above or when included in Diamond and Marquise Plan, HWA will not pay for any modifications, upgrades, or additional work needed to evacuate/clean a system of R-22 necessitated by the repair of existing equipment or the installation of new equipment.” “Unless the optional coverage for such is purchased, HWA is not liable for repairs related to costs of construction, carpentry, or other incidental costs associated with the alterations, modifications, or upgrades of all appliances, components or installation of different equipment and/or systems.”   We called the customer to review the Non-covered costs, and request their approval.  The customer refused and demanded a second opinion.   We advised her of an additional service charge(which would be paid to a second technician for their diagnosis) which she refused.  She threatened numerous complaints, and demanded a supervisor. The supervisor called her the same day, explaining why we would not send a second opinion to get the customer a second estimate for non covered charges.  The customer wanted to call their own technician outside of the warranty, which we could not reimburse.  We provided the customer a cash out amount on the cost of the repair, and advised they could accept that, or pay the non-covered costs.   The customer requested to call the technician, and the following morning, after talking to the technician directly, approved the non-covered costs.   Now, in March of 2017, we have a failure with  the upstairs Air conditioning unit, and the same events occurred:   ·        Customer files AC claim online ·        Warranty send technician to diagnose ·        Tech determines a failure with a leaking evaporator coil, and breaks down replacement costs, and non-covered modifications. ·        Customer disputes costs and demands a second opinion, stating she will complain until she gets one.   At this point the customer gets a representative to assign a technician, in error, which is cancelled less than 30 minutes later.  The customer is advised again, that they can accept the cash out, or accept the non-covered costs.  This time, the customer accepts the cash out.   So, to address their complaint:   The customer is well aware that we do not send second opinions, so they can attempt to reduce their non-covered costs, which is what they wished to do on both their claims.   We advise the customer of how long the payment could take, but that is the longest it will take.   We are sorry that the customer feels this does not address their problem, but we cannot send multiple technicians to the customer’s house, at no cost, so they choose the non-covered costs they prefer.  This is why they can, and have, accepted our  cash out.   Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted]Hello, like I have already mentioned that legally there is no liability issue as the city does not require the gas line to be grounded. Secondly, my amount of $400 includes the other arrangements I had to make because the insurance company kept on delaying the repair process.After the plumber made the first visit, it took a week for the plumber to come back out just to tell me on here s second visit that he cannot work on the pipe. Had he told me in his first visit I would have done something about it. After his second visit, I went to the City and asked them if they require me to ground the pipes in order to pass the inspections. The city inspector said not required. Currently I passed the inspection without grounding the pipes. I then conveyed this information to the insurance company and the plumbing company. They said someone will get back to me. Nobody replied and by now it was Friday morning. When I called the insurance company, they said well the plumber doesn't feel comfortable working on the house as the pipes are not grounded. I asked them why nobody called me with this update, and they had no reply, clearly they were stalling the process.so I had to call my builder and ask him the send his plumber who was not available till Monday. I had to buy heaters as my 18 month old son was starting to feel the effects of cold weather because of the neglect from the insurance company.so now I am asking them to reimburse me for the cost of heaters and repairs with the $400.This company has tried to stall the process at each and every step.As far as the other gas range claim, for which I have already paid the service fees. When I called the service company, [redacted] appliance, they said I am not in the system and I will have to repay the service fee if they want me to continie the repair (again an example of how insurance is not working the way they said it will). It is because of these reasons where the insurance company keeps stalling by not replying, and creating excuses to get more money out of me for repairs that are clearly there responsiblities, I am asking for full refund in good faith. By the way they still have to get back to me about my phone call I had made on Friday before the repairs. They said someone will get back to me in 24hrs. I am still waiting!!

September 26, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   Per contract section III.E:   “You will pay the Trade Call Fee or the actual cost of the Services covered under this Contract, whichever is less. The Trade Call Fee is for each visit by an Authorized Repair Technician, except as noted below, and is payable to the Authorized Repair Technician at the time of each visit. The Trade Call Fee applies to each call dispatched and scheduled, including but not limited to those calls wherein coverage is deemed Excluded, or denied.”   The customer is not entitled to a trade fee refund, nor are they entitled to a full contract refund.    We have processed their refund, less $30.00 cancellation fee, in the amount of $470.00.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 13, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] MO-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The warranty’s responsibility is for  rolled, asphalt shingle and clay tile roof structures.  None of which are located at this property.   We do not know what the customer means by  “confirmed their responsibility”, but this is not a covered issue.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

May 20, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite [redacted]    Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: Morse TN-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s complaint and are providing the following response. On March...

8, 2016, the customer closed on the purchase of their new property.  At this time, they did not have a contract with our company. Six weeks later, their agent called and ordered our basic coverage, at the customer’s request. The following day, the customer called our office, paid for the contract($570.00), and was looking for service on their AC system. The purpose of our home warranty contract is explained in section I.A.1 of our contract.  It states: “During the Coverage Period, HWA’s™ sole responsibility will be to arrange for an Authorized Repair Technician to provide Service(s) for Covered Systems and Components located on the Covered Property in accordance with the definitions, terms and conditions of this Contract.” The term ‘Covered Systems and Components’ is defined, per section I.B.7, as : “…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 break downs due to insufficient maintenance if at the time the issue or break down was unknown.” We would not address the maintenance of the system, but we offered the customer a referral to one of our local technicians. On April 27, 2016,  the customer called, with the maintenance technician on site, reporting that the unit needed to be repaired to run, and even with that the unit had been damaged due to long term misuse.  (It was covered in dog urine, which would not be a normal wear failure and not covered under our contract). We are sorry that the customer has run into this problem in their new home.  We will gladly provide the customer a refund of their $570.00 contract payment, upon receipt of their written request to cancel the contract. Sincerely, [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 5, 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 contacted them directly to address the issue.   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 5, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AZ-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have addressed the customer’s complaint, and he is receiving what he has demanded we provide.  This has resolved the customer’s issue, and we would request that he close this complaint, and reopen it if he does not receive his payment.      Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

August 4, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]:  [redacted]  NJ-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint and the...

technician assigned and approved to complete the issue has not communicated with us, in reference to the completion of the repair.    We have had to assign a second technician to address the issue..   Sincerely,   [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

October 19, 2015
Esther [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
Revdex.com
330 North Wabash, Suite 2006
Chicago, IL 60611
Re: 94573336: Johnson TX-1383698
Dear Ms. [redacted]:
We have received the customer's complaint, and have addressed this issue with them directly....


Sincerely,
Carl [redacted]
Escalated Special Handling

April 12, 2016 [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006            Chicago, IL  60611 Re: [redacted]: Harris  IL-[redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: We have received the customer’s rebuttal  and are providing the following response. The customer states that the equipment to address the replacement of his unit is still available.  He then has the option to take the offered payment and replace it as he sees fit.  We can provide him a check at our cost for the replacement, which was offered.  We will not find and offer outdated equipment. The technician’s quote is for the upgraded coil, and the full installation of said coil.  If the customer wishes to provide our office his written quotes from these other technicians, we can easily review them, because it is clear that those offers would not be fully inclusive of everything needed to complete the installation .  If he wishes to have one of these other technician’s perform the replacement of the system, he can take our offered check. As stated, we provide a check at our cost.  He is speaking to companies that are providing him quotes at retail cost. As we are not responsible for his $1,500.00 demand, we are not responsible for his ‘cooperating’  $700.00 demand(which we assume he would wish to be in addition to our $648.00 offer).  We are not going to negotiate to cover his non-covered costs.   He can approve $1375.00 to have the technician complete the full repair, or we can provide the $648.00 offered payment, per his Contractual agreement. Sincerely, [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

June 30, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006    Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted] AZ-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We have received the customer’s complaint, and the technician has...

advised that the repair will be completed tomorrow.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Svcs HWA Claims Handling Manager

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/10) */
September 10, 2015
Esther [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
Revdex.com
330 North Wabash, Suite 2006
Chicago, IL 60611
Re: [redacted] Sellers IN-1679020
Dear Ms. [redacted]
We have received the customer's complaint,...

and are providing the following response.
When we assigned the first technician to address the customer's claim, they provided a diagnostic that was not covered under the contract. When the customer disputed the diagnosis, we gladly sent a second opinion to re-evaluate the issue, but they never provided us their diagnosis. When we received a diagnosis from the third technician, we approved their repair the same day.
The customer references third party complaint sites (which he has also threatened to add complaints to), though their complaint is based on us not receiving the diagnosis from the technician which is outside of our control.
Sincerely,
Carl [redacted]
Escalated Special Handling
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/21) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
HWA has never fixed the original issue.
The 2nd repair tech said the 1st tech's diagnosis was wrong, it was low on freon and most likely leaking at the A-coil. He added freon on his own accord to get us up and running again. He claims he has provided HWA with the report including pics of his gauges as proof of the diagnosis. He would have no reason not to submit the claim, as that is how he gets reimbursed.
My A/C unit began inefficiently cooling again after the freon began leaking down and I made MANY calls to HWA for 2 more months thru the hot Summer, who kept placing the blame on the tech for not providing the data to them. The HVAC tech claims it is common to deal with that and having to resubmit as they deny receiving it.
The A/C leak has NOT been fixed, consequently the A/C unit runs longer and harder trying to keep up with the cooling all Summer due to the leak down, which was most likely the cause of the capacitor to fail. Additionally, running longer and harder to keep up, costs me needless additional money in electrical costs the entire Summer!!!
I chewed out HWA's customer service rep on 8/30/15 that it is Summertime, HOT, and my A/C is NOT working at all. Yet gain, and for the past 2 months, I was told it was the fault of HVAC tech #2 for not providing a diagnosis. I said to STOP blaming him as "if" indeed they are having trouble with "their contractor" GET ANOTHER ONE out here!!!
They indeed FINALLY got C. Morgan from Blue Flame HVAC out here, and replaced a part...BUT, he confirmed it was low on freon AGAIN, and filled the unit on his own accord.
It is leaking..it is leaking HWA, and it has NOT been REPAIRED, but you want me to keep allowing the unit to run longer and longer to try to keep up when it is low. A/C units DO NOT cool adequately when they are low on freon.
C. Morgan also scoffed at the incorrect diagnosis from the HVAC #1 company saying they were just wanting to sell something that was NOT needed.
Allowing the freon to continue to leak (and contaminating the environment with the older outlawed freon), and having it refilled every so often is NOT fixing what is the KNOWN problem. It continues to leak down, because there is a leak in the system...duh!
Apparently, I am not the only one fed up with HWA's lack of service. Tec #3, C. Morgan of Blue Flame said he was about fed up with them too, as HWA has NOT paid him for ANY of the service he has done for them. Apparently, they don't like to pay out claims to customers AND the techs after doing repairs. Crappy company you are HWA!!!
I want HWA to honor the warranty, and correctly repair my system. Paying the repairmen would be a nice bonus.
Scott [redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/09/30) */
September 30, 2015
Esther [redacted]
Dispute Resolution Specialist
Revdex.com
330 North Wabash, Suite 2006
Chicago, IL 60611
Re: 94568375: Sellers IN-1679020
Dear Ms. [redacted]
We have received the customer's response, and are providing the following response.
We have no explanation as to why the second technician would not provide us a diagnosis. The customer may insist that the second technician did, and if they had, we would have addressed their diagnosis. Unfortunately they did not provide it, which is why we sent a third technician. They provided us their diagnosis, which we approved. That technician, per a confirmation call to them to confirm the diagnosis, checked the customer's AC system, and did not find the system low on charge. He did not add refrigerant. Additionally, though it is not the concern of the customer, and not at all pertinent to their complaint, the technician has been paid.
Now it would seem that the customer feels there is still an issue with his system, and rather then follow the procedure of reopening a claim, he is doing as he told us he would previously. He is adding to our complaints online, to questioning anything he can in a public forum.
Sincerely,
Carl [redacted]
Escalated Special Handling

May 17, 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....

  On April 21, 2017, Mr. [redacted] opened a warranty with our company.   Eighteen days later(May 9, 2017), he filed an Air Conditioning  claim with our office, reporting a lack of cooling in the home.  Per our contractual agreement, we assigned a technician to diagnose the reported failure.    The following day, the technician provided the following online response:   “There is nothing wrong with the AC system or furnace. The thermostat is located in a bad spot. The vent system has issues with the layout of the system.”   The customer was advised of the technician’s diagnosis, and requested a second opinion.  We advised that we can send one, but if the technician agrees with the initial diagnosis, there would still be nothing to repair, and a second fee due.   Thus, the customer has filed multiple complaints, eluding that our technicians are biased, and claiming that the prior owners had no issues with the cooling for 15 years, though the unit in question is 6 years old, per the customer.    The day after the complaints were filed, he called our office, and accepted the second opinion.   We have contacted the customer, to discuss the issue, and left a message.   Sincerely,     [redacted] DE Services HWA Claims Handling Manager

April 20, 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 rebuttal, and are unsure why the customer has provided this response.     We can confirm that we spoke to the customer on April 8, 2017, when the customer called our realtor service line (the number for which they had to receive from their agent).   We can confirm the claim was filed on the evening of April 8, 2017, and the customer should have an e-mail to that effect.   The customer claiming that our response is ‘factually inaccurate’, is itself factually inaccurate, as we had/have representatives working on Saturdays, and he himself  admits that his wife spoke to an employee on April 8, 2017.   We consider this matter closed. Sincerely,     [redacted] Escalated Special Handling

November 7, 2016   [redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com 330 North Wabash, Suite 2006  Chicago, IL  60611   Re: [redacted]: [redacted] TX-[redacted]   Dear Ms. [redacted]:   We received the customer’s complaint  and provide the following response....

  On October 27, 2016, the customer reported a leak and slow drain from their kitchen sink, that they noticed two days prior. We immediately assigned the claim to a technician, per contract.   On October 28, 2016, the customer called us stating the technician missed their appointment.  We called other technicians, looking to schedule service before the weekend, but no technician was available.   On November 1, 2016, the technician originally assigned reported that they rodded the customer’s  drain.   We are sorry there was an issue with scheduling with the customer and the technician, but we are not responsible for scheduling the service. (The customer’s and the technician’s schedules are outside of our control.)   Sincerely,     [redacted] Claims Special Handling