Residential Warranty Corporation Of PA

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:They denied me on the phone twiceNow I'm getting a lawyer Regards, [redacted]

May 27, 2015Dear [redacted] :This letter is in response to your May 15, correspondenceResidential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has never received a written request for warranty performance from [redacted] RWC's records show that [redacted] 's home is warranted with RWC with a September 28, Effective Date of WarrantyBased upon the home's Effective Date of Warranty, the current coverage available is for Major Structural Defects of load-bearing componentsIn accordance with the warranty, the heating and air and plumbing are items not available for coverage under the warranty at this timeUpon receipt of a proper certified mail notice from the homeowner, RWC will review and administer the homeowner's request for warranty performance regarding the "structural failure" issue.Sincerely,Diane N.Manager Warranty Resolution Department

May 27, 2016Dear [redacted] :This letter serves to respond to your May 20, noticeRWC believes its administration was appropriate and complies with the obligations under The Limited WarrantyIn response to the assessment that was performed at the homeowner's home by RWC's Technical Supervisor and G & Home Improvements, LLC, RWC provided the homeowner with a modified monetary settlement offer on May 20, In response to RWC's offer, the homeowner requested a more detailed breakdown on how the individual repairs will be fixed and the cost associated with the repairsOn May 25, RWC responded providing more details regarding the repairsIn addition, the direct telephone contact extension number for RWC's Technical Supervisor was provided should the homeowner have any further questions relating to RWC's settlement offer.Sincerely,Diane LN [redacted] Manager Warranty Resolution

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] May 19, [redacted] The Revdex.com Revdex.com Serving Metro Washington DC and Eastern Pennsylvania Re: Revdex.com ID No [redacted] RWC File No [redacted] Dear [redacted] : This letter is to serve as a rebuttal to the response given by Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) on May 12, for a claim that I submitted Revdex.com ID No [redacted] for lack of warranty performance and failure to act accordingly in a timely mannerSince my initial request for warranty performance on November 13, 2016, RWC has consistently done a poor job in executing its obligations under the terms of the warranty contract (Application No [redacted] ) which was purchased in full on January 29, The response provided by Diane *N [redacted] on May 12, contains several statements that were misleading and that I feel need to be corrected Ms N [redacted] claims that RWC sent me, the homeowner, a monetary settlement offer for the issues granted for coverageWhile that is in part true there was an issue with the settlement that was sentPlease see my email to Warranty Administrator Jody K [redacted] sent on January 25, at 1:PM “Jody, The Settlement Offer you have submitted to us has a discrepancy in the settlement amountOn the first page you state "RWC will release a check in the amount of $upon the receipt of your completed "Full and Final Release", whereas, the second page states in the consideration section that $1,would be released Please clarify the discrepancy and comment on why the warranty coverage report is missing the deficiency of the exterior windowsYour Supervisor, Daine N [redacted] , assured me they would be on the report when I spoke to her last week Thanks” Her response was “ [redacted] ***, I apologize for the discrepancy in the documents The cash settlement offer to you was $1,as noted on the National Cost Estimate document that was attached That being said, I am going to check on the exterior windows issue I will respond in writing regarding this matter Jody K [redacted] Warranty Administrator Warranty Resolution Department” This discrepancy and the failure by RWC to appropriately diagnose any of the problems is why the settlement offer was rejectedThe settlement offer did not take into account the particulars or logistics need to repair the claim items After an extended period of no communication from RWC I sent this email on February 18, “MsK [redacted] , It has been several weeks since last we spokeAt that time you had mentioned getting a contractor out to our residence to assess the overall work effort and cost of our warranty issues Since I didn't hear back from you I went ahead and had a local company that specializes in home repairs come out and take a look at the deficienciesHis determination on issues 1a and from your settlement offer are particularly concerning to me Issue 1a: Install expandable spray foam between fiberglass basin and subfloorThe fiberglass basin lies directly on the subfloor and there is no way to inject the aforementioned spray foam without removing the fiberglass basinImproper installation of this basin is causing it to flex and gaps between the tile surround and basin are present The contractor also noted that this continued flexing will eventually cause a catastrophic failure of the main seal and drain pipe which would result in another major leakThe contractor would need to remove the tile above the basin in order to remove itOnce removed an appropriate membrane and subfloor would need to be added to prevent further flexing and leakingUnfortunately, the $you have allotted is not going to remedy the situation Issue 2: for the bowed exterior siding is a direct result of improper installation and lack of sufficient fastening of the siding to the exterior wallsThere are extensive gaps (16" +) where the exterior siding is not fastened to the exterior wall by either tacks or nailsThis lack of fastening is causing the siding to bow from the exterior wallTo fix this the siding would have to be removed from the place of issue all the way to the bottomBecause exterior siding is installed from the bottom up the only proper way to ensure a tight fit would be to start from the bottom and work up to the affected areaThe contractor also noted several other areas on the outside of the home where this deficiency is occurring and would need to further inspect these areas to determine if the same conditions existThe amount your company has offered in the amount of $comes nowhere close to the $estimate I receivedThis amount is contingent on the isolated instance and does not reflect the additional occurrences that were observed on the remaining exterior Since communication with your company in regards to our warranty issues has been infrequent and unsatisfactory, I am giving you business days to reply to this in writing before submitting a complaint to the Revdex.com Thank You [redacted] RWC File No [redacted] North East MD ***” Ms N [redacted] claims in the second paragraph of her response that “RWC learned that the first contractor it contacted, to schedule a visit to the home to provide RWC with an estimate, was previously contacted by the homeowner with repair costs that exceeded the repairs required for the issues covered under The Limited Warranty”The only contractor I ever contacted to look at the items in my RWC claim was [redacted] , [redacted] @***.com I spoke to [redacted] on 5/19/to confirm this claim and he clearly stated to me that neither he nor his employees have ever received a solicitation from RWC to make a warranty estimate for my claimHe also stated that he would be willing to answer any questions regarding this claim If RWC is truly interested or as MsN [redacted] puts it “hopeful” that arbitration will not be necessary, then why the constant delays and obfuscation when it comes to executing any part of its obligations under this warranty contractIt has been over months and not one thing has been repaired or fixedIn my opinion, RWC is operating under pretenses and is completely fraudulent when it advertises on its website that “As a savvy homeowner, you need to know what residential warranties can mean to you in terms of value and protectionWhether you are just beginning the construction process, already have a new home warranty in place, or are looking to augment your coverage with other options, you’re starting in the right spotRWC is here to help, no matter what stage of the process you are in!” For me and my family RWC has yet to helpSincerely, [redacted] Completely Dissatisfied Customer

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because of the same reasons I explained last time Just because a company has legal documents stating how they can operate doesn't mean it's correct or honest Regards, [redacted]

June 18, 2015Dear [redacted] :Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has received your June 9, letter regarding [redacted] 's rejection of RWC's June 1, responseI provided an explanation of RWC's administration and its coverage determination in my June 1, letter RWC's position as outlined in my June 1, letter remains the same.Sincerely, Residential Warranty Company, LLCDiane N, Manager Warranty Resolution Department

June 9, 2015Dear *** ***:Please consider this a written response to the correspondence provided to MsDiane N*** and received by HOME of Texas (HOME) on June 5, for the above noted property.HOME received a request forwarranty performance on January 20, The effective date for ***
***’s home is June 29, and the provisions for coverage are set forth in sections II.Cof the Limited Warranty and V.C.I of the TRCC Addendum to the Limited WarrantyBased upon the effective date, Major Structural Defect (MSD) and Major Structural Component (MSC) coverage is availableThe specific definition is outlined in section I.Bof the Limited Warranty and V.Cof the TRCC Addendum to the Limited Warranty.As a result of the request for warranty performance provided by *** ***, a fact finding inspection was scheduled for February 18, and a confirmation letter of this appointment was sent to all partiesThe inspection was performed by MrGeorge Sarek, PE and a report was provided to HOME’s office on March 6, 2015.A Warranty Coverage Report outlining the decision of coverage was sent to *** *** via email on April 3, No coverage was provided for a Major Structural Defect (MSD) or for a Major Structural Component (MSC) as the criteria had not been met*** *** has continued structural coverage until June 29, 2019.If *** *** should continue to dispute the decision of coverage as provided by HOME, the next process available through the Limited Warranty would be binding arbitration of the unresolved warranty issue.Should you need further assistance you may contacted Diane N*** at *** extension ***.Sincerely HOME of TexasCeri L, Warranty Advisor Warranty Resolution Department

June 1, 2015Dear *** ***:This letter serves to respond to your May 22, notice regarding the complaint filed by *** ***Please note that the address of the home In question is referenced above and is not the address under Customer InformationThe home's Effective Date
of Warranty is November 16, 2007.On February 7, Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) received a written request for warranty performance from *** and *** *** In response to the request, RWC opened file no***Based upon the Effective Date of Warranty, the home was in Year l of coverageThe issues requested for warranty performance were "microwave hood light is not working" and "fireplace has a huge draft coming into living room", in Year of warranty coverage the builder is the Warrantor and the responsible party for covered warranty issuesRWC communicated with the homeowner and builder through its mediation process and the potential warranty issues were resolvedRWC sent a letter to **and ***, *** *** on March to this effect and informed the homeowners that their file was considered closed.On February 13, RWC received another written reauest for warranty performance from *** and *** *** dated February 11, The issues requested for warranty performance were "doors sticking and not latching and cracks in the wait"RWC communicated with **and *** and explained the Major Structural Defect coverage available on the homeRWC scheduled a fact-finding inspection at the homeThe fact-finding inspection took place on March 20, The fact-finding inspection revealed that the homeowners had repairs to the foundation slab performed in addition to cosmetic repairsConsequential damages are specifically excluded from warranty coverageAnd, the coverage for a Major Structural Defect was denied because there was no substantiation of a Major Structural DefectIn addition, as stated in Section I.D.8, WHAT YOUR LIMITED WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER, "A Defect that you repair without prior written authorization of the Administrator." On May 21, the homeowners notified RWC that they wish to start arbitration on this claim, In response, arbitration information was provided to the homeownersUpon receipt of the executed Request For Binding Arbitration form and payment to the chosen arbitration service, RWC will process the homeowners' arbitration request.Sincerely,Residential Warranty Company, LLCDiane N, Manager Warranty Resolution Department

Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) is in receipt of your July 1, noticeRWC does not a have record of receiving a written request for warranty performance from the homeowner Written notice to RWC by
certified mail, return receipt requested is required The home's Effective Date of Warranty is March 30, Therefore the ten years term of the warranty has expired and no obligation is owed by RWC under its warranty.Sincerely, Residential Warranty Company, LLCDiane LN***, ManagerWarranty Resolution Department

DO NOT BUY A HOME COVERED UNDER THIS COMPANYI am a resident who bought a BRAND-new home 3yrs ago and can honesty say we should have did more research Since the day we moved in we had nothing but problemsThe builders tell you if you have any problems call themThat's cause when you call RWC all they do is call the builder to come out and fix the problemThe Builders do what I call a bandage fix of the problem after you have to wait months just for them to come out (so they can where down the time on your warranty) but they do bandage job just to get you pass the warranty mark; which is 1-years and suppose to be 10years for structural and foundation damage; which if it's water coming in your basement from cracks in your foundation( from the Builders mouth) the Warranty company will not cover it cause they consider that waterproofing and Waterproofing is only covered until the 1st or 2nd yearRWC tell you it's nothing they can do cause your pass the mark, even though they never fixed the problem in the first placeALL the residents that stay on my roll (town homes) have problems with their basements, they all had bandage jobs done from the builder, which water continue to flood AND leak inWhich is a major cost to get fixSo now you have to come out of pocket for a brand-new home that shouldn't have been a problem in the first placeThe best thing I can tell you if you already purchased a home that is SUPPOSE TO BE covered under this company is to not call them first or the builder cause they are working together so they don't have to come out of pocket and WILL tell you anything; but hire a outside contractor to come in to inspect the area, get all paperwork with estimates, if RWC want to send out their own inspector "Let them and have your hired inspector there also

June 9, Dear *** ***:Please consider this a written response to the correspondence provided to MsDiane N*** and received by HOME of Texas (HOME) on June 5, for the above noted property.HOME received a request forwarranty performance on January 20, The
effective date for *** ***’s home is June 29, and the provisions for coverage are set forth in sections II.Cof the Limited Warranty and V.C.I of the TRCC Addendum to the Limited WarrantyBased upon the effective date, Major Structural Defect (MSD) and Major Structural Component (MSC) coverage is availableThe specific definition is outlined in section I.Bof the Limited Warranty and V.Cof the TRCC Addendum to the Limited Warranty.As a result of the request for warranty performance provided by *** ***, a fact finding inspection was scheduled for February 18, and a confirmation letter of this appointment was sent to all partiesThe inspection was performed by MrGeorge Sarek, PE and a report was provided to HOME’s office on March 6, 2015.A Warranty Coverage Report outlining the decision of coverage was sent to *** *** via email on April 3, No coverage was provided for a Major Structural Defect (MSD) or for a Major Structural Component (MSC) as the criteria had not been met*** *** has continued structural coverage until June 29, 2019.If *** *** should continue to dispute the decision of coverage as provided by HOME, the next process available through the Limited Warranty would be binding arbitration of the unresolved warranty issue.Should you need further assistance you may contacted Diane N*** at *** extension ***.Sincerely HOME of TexasCeri L,
Warranty Advisor Warranty Resolution Department

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
The engineer hired was shown pictures prior to the foundation being corrected. The builder *** also seen the damage before it was fixed. None of this was in the engineers report. Also, everyone is OVERLOOKING the fact that an accredited foundation company did an inspection on the home; of which is their specialty and found foundation issues. I believe RWC is just in place to keep the builder from paying out of pocket for any major home issues by refusing and finding ways around the warranty clauses
Regards,
*** ***

June 18, 2015Dear *** ***:Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has received your June 9, letter regarding *** ***'s rejection of RWC's June 1, responseI provided an explanation of RWC's administration and its coverage determination in my June 1, letter RWC's position as outlined in my June 1, letter remains the same.Sincerely,Residential Warranty Company, LLCDiane N, Manager Warranty Resolution Department

May 12, 2016Dear *** ***:This letter serves to respond to your May 5, notice regarding a complaint that was submitted by the homeownerOn November 13, Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) received a written request for warranty performance from the homeownerBased upon the home's
January 29, Effective Date of Warranty the home was in Year of coverageRWC communicated with the homeowner on several occasions from November 24, to December 10,During this time of communication RWC discussed the issues that were claimed by the homeowner, the warranty coverages and RWC scheduled an inspectionThe Fact-Finding Inspection took place on December 16,On January 22,RWC sent the homeowner its Warranty Coverage Report outlining RWCs coverage determinationsRWC also sent the homeowner a monetary settlement offer for the issues granted for coverage utilizing a national cost estimateBased upon the homeowner's rejection of RWC's monetary settlement offer, RWC determined it was appropriate to schedule s contractor to provide RWC with an estimate for the covered issuesMoreover, during this time the homeowner submitted additional issues to RWC for coverage considerationRWC inspected the additional issues on February 29, and RWC issued another Warranty Coverage Report covering additional items on March 17, 2016.RWC learned that the first contractor it contacted, to schedule a visit to the home to provide RWC with an estimate, was previously contacted by the homeowner and provided the homeowner with repair costs that exceeded the repairs required for the issues covered under The Limited WarrantyRWC contacted a second contractor who visited the home to provide RWC with an estimateBased upon a disagreement between the homeowner and contractor regarding the extent of repairs that are appropriate, the contractor declined to provide RWC with an estimateIn response to this occurrence, RWC contacted a third contractor to visit the home in order to provide ftWC with an estimateRWC's Technical Supervisor attended the assessment at the home, for the covered issues, with the third contractor to determine the appropriate repairsRWC is currently in communication with the contractor and anticipates obtaining a Finalized estimate shortlyUpon receipt of the contractor's estimate and RWC’s review and approval of the estimate, RWC will provide the homeowner with a new monetary settlement offer.RWC believes its administration of the homeowner's requests for warranty performance has been appropriateRWC has been in communication with the homeowner during its administration of the homeowner's requests for warranty performanceIf a resolution cannot be reached, arbitration will be available to the homeowner for the unresolved warranty issuesWe are hopeful arbitration will not be necessary and RWC will continue to work with the homeowner towards a resolution for the issues covered under the warranty.Sincerely,Residential Warranty Company, LLC

May 27, 2015
Dear [redacted]:This letter is in response to your May 15, 2015 correspondence. Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has never received a written request for warranty performance from [redacted] RWC's records show that [redacted]'s home is warranted with RWC with...

a September 28, 2007 Effective Date of Warranty. Based upon the home's Effective Date of Warranty, the current coverage available is for Major Structural Defects of load-bearing components. In accordance with the warranty, the heating and air and plumbing are items not available for coverage under the warranty at this time. Upon receipt of a proper certified mail notice from the homeowner, RWC will review and administer the homeowner's request for warranty performance regarding the "structural failure" issue.Sincerely,Diane N.Manager Warranty Resolution Department

May 27, 2015Dear [redacted]:This letter is in response to your May 15, 2015 correspondence. Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has never received a written request for warranty performance from [redacted] RWC's records show that [redacted]'s home is warranted with RWC with a September 28,...

2007 Effective Date of Warranty. Based upon the home's Effective Date of Warranty, the current coverage available is for Major Structural Defects of load-bearing components. In accordance with the warranty, the heating and air and plumbing are items not available for coverage under the warranty at this time. Upon receipt of a proper certified mail notice from the homeowner, RWC will review and administer the homeowner's request for warranty performance regarding the "structural failure" issue.Sincerely,Diane N.Manager Warranty Resolution Department

June 18, 2015Dear [redacted]:Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) has received your June 9, 2015 letter regarding [redacted]'s rejection of RWC's June 1, 2015 response. I provided an explanation of RWC's administration and its coverage determination in my June 1, 2015 letter RWC's position as outlined in my June 1, 2015 letter remains the same.Sincerely,
Residential Warranty Company, LLCDiane N, Manager Warranty Resolution Department

Residential Warranty Company, LLC (RWC) is in receipt of your July 1, 2015 notice. RWC does not a have record of receiving a written request for warranty performance from the homeowner.  Written notice to RWC...

by certified mail, return receipt requested is required.  The home's Effective Date of Warranty is March 30, 2005.  Therefore the ten years term of the warranty has expired and no obligation is owed by RWC under its warranty.Sincerely, 
Residential Warranty Company, LLC
Diane L. N[redacted], Manager
Warranty Resolution Department

May 27, 2016Dear [redacted]:This letter serves to respond to your May 20, 2016 notice. RWC believes its administration was appropriate and complies with the obligations under The Limited Warranty. In response to the assessment that was performed at the homeowner's home by RWC's Technical Supervisor and G & 5 Home Improvements, LLC, RWC provided the homeowner with a modified monetary settlement offer on May 20, 2016. In response to RWC's offer, the homeowner requested a more detailed breakdown on how the individual repairs will be fixed and the cost associated with the repairs. On May 25, 2016 RWC responded providing more details regarding the repairs. In addition, the direct telephone contact extension number for RWC's Technical Supervisor was provided should the homeowner have any further questions relating to RWC's settlement offer.Sincerely,Diane L. N[redacted]Manager Warranty Resolution

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
The engineer hired was shown pictures prior to the foundation being corrected.  The builder **. [redacted] also seen the damage before it was fixed.  None of this was in the engineers report.  Also, everyone is OVERLOOKING the fact that an accredited foundation company did an inspection on the home; of which is their specialty and found foundation issues.  I believe RWC is just in place to keep the builder from paying out of pocket for any major home issues by refusing and finding ways around the warranty clauses.
Regards,
[redacted]