My Air conditioning system stopped working. I called RWS as the warranty manual indicates. They indicated that I'd be receiving a call from a repair tech within 48 hours to setup an appointment. I never received the call. After 3 days I called back. They said it may take a while longer because they are busy (It was August after all). I waited. No call. I called back. They said a different company would be calling me. Several days later after no call I called back Then they told me that I could try to get someone on my own and gave me all of their requirements. After finding a company that met all of their criteria they came out immediately and diagnosed the problem and gave me a quote. I submitted all of the forms that RWS required and they told me they would pay the quote that the company gave me because it required a completely new system. It was impossible to replace the cooling coil (a visible hole blew out on the the copper coil lines) alone since the unit was old and and the type of system (not to mention specific system) had not been manufactured in several years. And since the system was an old R22 unit that could not be updated to the newer freon and any new replacement parts would not work with R22 freon, replacement of the whole system was the only real solution. The would not budge. The insisted that I contact the company that diagnosed the system and have them create a quote for what it would cost to replace the coil if that coil were available.Yeah. They laughed to when I called and asked them. They said that they might know someone who could build a custom coil but that would cost way too much and they could guarantee the work. Let's face it, it was a stupid request.
So I just resigned myself to having been taken by a scam and that I was not going to get paid for the service call or the repair (which to date I have not been paid). I called them and cancelled the policy under the terms of the contract. They told me that I'd get a refund in 30 to 40 days. That was over 2 months ago at this time and still no refund and I can't even get them on the phone now.
I have lived in this house less than a month. I contacted RWS regarding my hot water heater leaking and they told me they called but no one answered so they would send out a work order. After waiting the required 48 hours and having no response, I contacted them again and they told me a work order was never sent because I was contacting my own plumber. I told them that was not true and that they said they were sending a work order, the girl became very hostile and told me that's what was listed in my file. She refused to assist me any further, would not answer any questions or give me her name. She hung up on me. I called back, the girl refused to give me her name after asking repeatedly, refused to assist me in any way, and hung up on me. I regret ever purchasing this service. I have contacted another plumber and it is doubtful if I get reimbursed.
Denied my claim for an issue with my heater that could not be identified at inspection because it was April and not the dead of winter. After the claim was submitted, I spoke with several individuals that informed me that service records would be needed. I told every individual I spoke with that they were not available and I purchased the home less than a year ago, and was instructed I needed a receipt that I had the unit serviced prior to their processing of my claim. I then paid $250 to have the unit serviced, only to be informed afterwards that it the claim fell outside of the terms of coverage due to the lack of maintenance.
If I had known this was the case, I would have progressed immediately to repairing the issue myself instead of having the unit serviced and awaiting approval. Because of this, I have had to go through two additional local freezes in which my heater could not warm my house above 60 degrees F, and spent an Extra $250 getting the unit serviced to their request.
This is an irresponsible way to run a business in this insane housing market when homebuyers have no power to get repairs done prior to closing. It leaves all the risk on the buyer and makes the home warranty included in the purchase absolutely useless. This company should be ashamed of leaving people out in the cold, literally and figuratively.
They never answer the phone, unless you press 1 to buy or renew this crap warranty.
They denied my claim, saying that I spray cleaning product in the stove, which I did not, even if I did it should be covered. Don't waste your time or money. They are Crooks!
Worst communication ever! Beware buyer they do not return calls or emails! Stay away!
Had my well pump replaces and all the repairs that come with it on August 13, 2021, $1999.50 bill, I was under the impression by the department that set you up with a contractor that I would only be liable for the deductible, the agent even give the okay to MY contractor to do the work not letting either of us know this company only pays $500 for the pump, it says for the pump, what about labor, other parts? This should have been an electrical AND plumbing claim (told by ex-claims rep at RWS) but we didn't know so we just filed one claim, we were taken advantage of by not being informed it should be two claims, we were NEVER told all they'd pay out is $500 so that was a surprise! we have been mislead the whole time on this claim, no one will return my calls (about a dozen to date, or more), no return emails (about 5-6 of them). Was communicating with supervisor Josh extension 2503 then he sent me to the case manager David extension 2547, neither will return calls or emails. replied back to email I got stating this should have been a plumbing and electrical claim but no one will return emails or calls! Was sent a letter stating they would have the $500 to us within 30 days, well its been well over 30 days! I want and think we deserve more compensation for this job as you all knew it should have been a plumbing and electrical claim and did not let us know that. We have been mislead, lied to and taken advantage of. If you are looking to buy extended home warranty, I suggest stay away from this company, in my opinion they are not honest. I am looking and will find the CEO contact number for this company and will report them.
The homeowner has indicated that “the warranty trying [sic] to collect money from me while no work was done on my AC Unit”, which is concerning to RWS due to our having possession of an invoice and multiple communication records between RWS, the homeowner, and the contractor that would indicate otherwiseHowever, for the homeowner's benefit, below is a breakdown of all the items relevant to this claim, at this pointPlease review and reach out if you have any additional questions: Overtime FeesThe homeowner submitted their claim on a Friday and, despite its non-emergency status, insisted on a contractor being dispatched immediately over the weekendWhile RWS does not charge over-time fees, our policy clearly states that a contractor may, for non-emergency claimsThe homeowner was advised of this by both RWS and the contractor yet insisted on the immediate service and so agreed to the overtime charges, the cost of which ($295.00) is due to the contractor immediatelyService Call FeesThe homeowner wanted two HVAC units serviced, which resulted in two service call fees as the policy clearly states that the service call fee applies to each mechanical breakdown, for each distinct malfunction and so multiple service call fees may apply to one claimHowever, later, the homeowner refused to pay the $due, which is grounds for immediate cancellation of his warranty, without possibility of refund, which will be addressed further belowThat cost is due to the contractor immediatelyRepair over ReplacementThe contractor informed the homeowner that one of the units needed to be replaced due to its age, as it would be more expensive to temporarily repair the item over replacing themHe quoted a replacement to the homeowner but the homeowner insisted on immediate service and so insisted on the repairThe contractor explained the risks and expenses of repairing over replacement, and contacted RWS for authorizationAn RWS representative spoke with the homeowner, who insisted he knew the risks and that he still wanted the repairThe contractor was given authorization per the homeowner’s demands and so replaced the capacitor in the older unit and ensured it was working when he leftFreon FeesThe contractor also re-filled the Freon in both units, which resulted in a total of 10lbs of R-refrigerant being added, even though the homeowner’s policy clearly states that the homeowner is responsible for the differences in costs for any refrigerant required other than R-410AThe contractor was informed of this over the phone prior to the repair, yet opted for the repair regardlessThe $cost is due to the contractor immediatelyLeak ChecksIn addition, the homeowner should be aware that leak checks are not covered under his policy, even though he had the contractor conduct two leak checks – one on each unitHowever, in a good faith gesture the contractor did not charge anything for the two hours spent on the leak check, or the labor for the leak check itselfDespite this, the homeowner still refused to pay the contractor for any of the charges the homeowner knew were dueRWS would advise the homeowner to re-read his policy carefully to ensure he is aware of the full extent of his coverageIf he has any questions, he is more than welcome to contact RWS and our trained customer service representatives will be able to explain all covered items to ensure there is no confusionWith regards to this situation, with the repair authorized repeatedly by the homeowner, against the advice of both RWS and the contractor, the homeowner is liable to the Contractor for a total of $The remainder costs will be covered by RWS pursuant to the homeowner’s policyIf the homeowner continues to refuse to pay this amount to the contractor for services already rendered, not only will the contractor have legal remedies against the homeowner, but RWS will be forced to cancel the homeowner’s policy, without refund for failure to pay the applicable fees, pursuant to the cancellation provision of the policyAt this point in time, the homeowner must send a check to the contractor in full payment of the owed amount, and forward proof of the same to RWS by September Failure to do so will result in an immediate cancellation of the homeowner’s policy and any other remedy RWS, or the contractor if they feel so inclined, feels obligated to pursue against the homeowner
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] first of all my repair were to replace leaking cooling coils in units 1-ton heil and 1-ton heil and parts and labor were in excess of RWS was aware of this and I was led to believe they would be sending the maximum amount covered at I was never told anything about a the parts alone were over plus labor for men over RWS is full of [redacted] regarding this amount being over their cost I would be happy to provide written cost of these items I would never agree to allow RWS or anyone associated with them on my propertyI would also, add that they have had other unresolved complaints as per my realtor Realtor refuses to use this company any longer RWS has no customer service and would not even return my phone calls regarding this matterThanks Revdex.com for your assistance in contacting RWS I will proceed to file complaint with state of Tennessee and contact an attorney for advise in filing small claims against RWS I HAVE A CONTRACT AND IT IS ENFORCEABLE I will make known via social media the pitfalls of using RWS as a home warranty companyBUYER BEWARE OF RWS Regards, [redacted]
The homeowner’s termite protection plan covers “new infestations” after the home inspectionThe homeowner filed a claim stating they witnessed termites but, in the estimate they submitted, the contractor only confirmed the home inspection’s previously disclosed findings and there was no indication in the bid that new termite activity had been foundAs a result, the damage appeared to be pre-existing, which precluded coverage and so the claim was deniedAfter the denial was mailed, the homeowner’s home inspector called in and explained to the Director of the Warranty Department that the homeowner had seen new termite activity and he argued their caseThe Director exercised his discretion and had the homeowners’ claim representative call the contractor directly to find out what was going onThe contractor stated that he was unaware the bid was going to a warranty company and so he wrote the bid for the homeowners, leaving out the new infestation signs and the price breakdown requiredAfter speaking with him, it was apparent that the homeowner’s claim was coveredThe contractor told RWS that they would charge $to chemically treat the infected areas, which is what the homeowner's plan covers, and the Director approved the amountAs a result, a check in the amount of $($– the homeowner’s $deductible) was submitted earlier this month and mailed July If the homeowner would like to decline the buyout check, RWS is happy to re-review the claim a second time (with no guarantee that the review will result in a higher buyout amount)To re-open their claim, the homeowner simply needs to VOID and return the buyout check and provide an estimate for chemical treatment of the infected areas only, which is the treatment covered by their warranty, and the claim will be re-opened immediately
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowAs previously stated, the following actions and lack thereof are unacceptable, and would warrant an effort by the company to rectify the situation with the customer, which RWS is refusing to do Never responded to approve or deny my 8/claim recommended repairs - proven in call records Never responded to or even recorded my 8/claim that the unit stopped working and needed urgent attention - proven in call records Never told me they decided to send me a $check for a buyout of my parts (I had to call a week later and learn that myself)- proven in call records Cut the check a week late after they told me themselves that October was the last day they could cut to be in compliance with their day policy Sent a check for much less than the $I was told I would receive, and never communicated this change to me- proven in call records Any business that calls the above actions "going above and beyond for the customer" has some serious soul-searching to do Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle">Re: Complaint ID [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: We are in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his garage door openers Homeowner called in the complaint with the garage door openers on 7/23/@ 12:15:pm stating that all openers were not opening On 7/31/@ 2:pm Our office spoke to the contractor that the homeowner had chosen Our office was told by the contractor that on 7/22/there had been an electrical storm and it looked like the units had been struck by lightning At this point in time we denied his claim On 8/1/@ 4:pm Homeowner called in and said that he contractor was incorrect At this point he was transferred to the claims manager voicemail (she leaves at 4p EST daily) On 8/4/@ 9:am (next business day) The claims manager called, she received MrB [redacted] ’s voicemail and left a message stating that she was returning his call and for him to call her back On 8/7/1:pm The claims manager spoke to the homeowner and MrB [redacted] stated that the lightning storm was after he had filed his claim At this point a copy of the home inspection was requested On 8/8/Our office received a copy of the home inspection On 8/11/11:pm The claims manager called, she received MrB [redacted] ’s voicemail and left a message stating that she had further questions about his claim and to please call back On 8/21/5:pm Received invoice from the contractor that the homeowner chose stating that all motors were bad RWS relayed to Mr B [redacted] that our cost for failed motors on garage doors is $per opener and that there is a deductible ($75) per mechanical failure The warranty states that “Each and every distinct breakdown of any part or component of any covered mechanical system as determined by an authorized contractor constitutes a distinct claim.” The homeowner had separate garage door openers that failed which would require $deductibles The limits of liability #& #state: # “RWS reserves the right to make a cash payment to a policyholder in lieu of repair/replacement for the defective part(s) The payment will reflect RWS negotiated cost for service and may be less than retail.” # RWS shall be responsible only for the costs of installation of a similar part in the case of an obsolete or unavailable part.” We sincerely regret any inconvenience that MrB [redacted] experienced; however, Residential Warranty Services followed the terms of our warranty I have attached the specific pages of the warranty for your reference Sincerely, John S [redacted] Director of Operations Residential Warranty Services
This homeowner, months into a month policy, has received repairs costing 3x the amount the warranty actually cost to obtain and there has been NO money taken from the homeowner as the policy was paid for up front and in fullThis homeowner has profited greatly from her one year warranty with RWS, making it all the more bewildering why she would file a complaint on an issue she personally knew had been resolved beforehand In fall of 2015, the homeowner had a plumbing issue and contacted her own contractor to diagnose the issueThis contractor charged a service call fee; a fee that was unnecessarily spent by the homeowner as she then called RWS to open a claim, which resulted in our own contractor needing to be sent and a deductible owed per the terms of her warranty with usThe homeowner did not contact us about this reimbursement issue until late March 2016, wherein she was immediately contacted by the Director of the Company (on March 2016, the same day she filed this complaint)He spoke with her and told her he would immediately process the requested refund, not out of any obligation but simply out of a want to ensure complete customer satisfaction That same day, the Director honored the conversation and submitted the reimbursementUnfortunately, the homeowner did not and, that same day, knowing what she was told by the Director, filed this complaint regardlessThe homeowner has not been trying to get this resolved since October; the only contact we had with her with regards to this claim have taken place this week and, as stated above, finalized wholly in accordance with the homeowner's desires We here at RWS are saddened that she has so blatantly acted in bad faith - the homeowner was told, directly by the Director of the Company, that he would personally submit the reimbursement for processing yet she still filed a complaint within hours of that conversation falsely claiming a lack of communication and of RWS "giving us the run around"The reimbursement, which we have NO obligation to pay, is currently being processed, as promisedYou will receive it within business days
It is clear this homeowner does not wish to honor the terms of the warranty and that he would rather resort to extorting a company for more money, evident not only by his responses to the Revdex.com but by his contacting a reporter, providing that reporter information, and then insinuating that, unless RWS pays his ransom price, our name will be dragged through the mudThis is unacceptable and abhorrent At this point, the homeowner has clearly declined the previous offer set forth and so the owner of the Company has asked me to offer the homeowner, one final time, the initial offer of $375, no review requiredOf course this final offer is dependent upon this payment settling the issue for goodIf the homeowner accepts this amount, he must respond to the Revdex.com accordingly by noon tomorrow in order for a check to be both processed and mailed tomorrow as any further delay in an acceptance will result in a delay in receiving a check Otherwise, if the homeowner continues to push for more money or otherwise threaten or extort RWS, the original buyout amount of $will be processed and this issue will be litigated elsewhere with the homeowner keeping in mind that he will be held both legally and financially responsible for any damages that occur due to any defamatory statements that are published about our company due to his statements
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved Regards, [redacted] **
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] Regards, [redacted] I am not denying that the company did try and call to get my money back but everything else that was said was a lie they approved the work and told me a check would be mailed I dont have time to set here and make lies up about a company, If they would have explained to me the approval process we wouldnt be here right now
Worst company I have ever dealt with in my lifeNever received my reimbursement check for what I spent over my deductibleEveryone I spoke to gave me different information and lied to meFind ANY other company to deal with other than this oneI spoke to them 15+ times and every time they told me there were zero notes in the system from my previous conversationsEvery person I spoke to said they would call me back and never did onceThey need to be put out of business with how they run their companyAbsolutely embarrassing
RWS has no record of the homeowner calling in about a failed unit or about setting up a claim for a failed unit, which is unusual due to the ample records of the homeowner calling in regarding her A/C tuclaim and the associated buyoutIf the homeowner would provide proof she contacted RWS and filed a claim for her failed unit, we would be happy to re-evaluateOtherwise, as the homeowner had no issue filing a claim previously, as there exist no records of a second claim being filed, and as the homeowner was aware of warranty procedures yet expressly failed to follow them with regards to her A/C replacement (which immediately precludes coverage completely), there is nothing more RWS can do with regards to her failed A/C unitWith regards to the accusations regarding her claim buyout check, RWS has multiple records of conversations with the homeowner regarding her buyout, which the homeowner has mistakenly misreported in her Revdex.com response by stating “no one at RWS bothered to call and say they decided to offer a buyout”This is simply untrue as the homeowner was notified multiple times (including the first business day after she filed her claim when her claim was initially approved, along with each time she called in thereafter) that she would be issued a buyout check, which was currently being processedAt no point was she unaware that she would be receiving a buyout check, though the final amount was not finalized until the entire approval process was completeAs stated previously, the homeowner’s claim consisted of no actual failures, which should have precluded coverage entirely under her warrantyThe homeowner cannot deny this as both she and her contractor have admitted the sameDespite this, RWS went above and beyond their obligations by covering those items which were operating less than perfectly by replacing a ‘weak’ (yet working) blower capacitor and paying for a refrigerant refill due to an ‘indoor coil icing up’ due to ‘low refrigerant’However, it is important the homeowner understand that the above had not failed and so RWS had no obligation to cover any of this claimTo claim that RWS should also cover all of the ‘recommended repairs’, despite the existence of no failures, including a ‘coil replacement’ that the contractor had already stated could be repaired with a Freon refill (which was covered), is simply impossibleTherefore, as RWS has stated earlier, “unless the homeowner has additional information that would change the circumstances or information already received, the homeowner is due no additional money and this claim remains closed”
Residential Warranty Services (RWS) has multiple complaints and bad reviewsIn good conscience, cannot recommend RWS for any warranty servicesRealtors and inspection companies should be warned against RWS warrantiesIn an initial home inspection, both the home and pest inspection companies noted past termite damage on the property with small probability of current termite issuesThe home inspector allowed the property to pass inspection with the condition that RWS would cover any inspection issues within a 90-day warranty periodWithin days, the original pest inspection company confirmed evidence of live termitesRWS did not honor their warranty agreement thru the home inspection companyAs such, the home owners worked directly with RWS and their recommended pest inspection companyRWS tried repeatedly to refute their own contracted pest company recommendations for treatmentRWS originally offered to partially cover the cost of a surface treatment not allowed by the stateTo resolve the treatment dispute, the pest inspection company wrote a formal letter and email stating that they could not perform the treatment mandated by RWSThe claim process took months (8/18/- 11/7/16)The process included over emails, phone calls, and written correspondence from RWS contracted pest control company for Residential Warranty Service to only cover 40% of the pest control costs
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowActually none of my questions are addressed by RWSThis company is running a borderline scam Yes, I was told ONLY RWS will assign the contractorCan you imagine someone living in Mason, OH will get a contractor from someone Columbus, OHThey have assigned the service contractor No Freon was addedYou would think, if they added Freon, they would list the price of the FreonOnly deductible is mentioned in the priceAlso, I contacted the service guy and he said he only added very little Freon just to start the systemThe service guys are probably the best in using grammar and instead of saying need adding, they said addedAlso, I had a subsequent diagnosis done, and the new service contractor needed to add FreonRWS is running a scam on this subjectCan they show the invoice where the service guy showed the price of the Freon they added The RWS claim lady said some very unprofessional stuffShe definitely told me that she has video proofMy demand is RWS fixes the issue and deductible will be paid Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below In response to each of their individual statements in their message, I have come up with a response to each piece that is not accurate according to their business documentation and the way they function.The claim was NOT justly handled under their terms Their terms are very vague and not defined with what they seem to have just stated; they do not discuss great detail per claim in their coverage binder.1) On a claim to be covered in their state (Indiana) most likely does not meet the cost of a claim to be covered in my state (New Jersey) In essence, the cost of parts & labor in the state of New Jersey is most likely more expensive than other states, and I'm sure New Jersey is not the same nor cheaper claim cost than Indiana may be A great example is one previous claim regarding our hot water heater The cost to replace was $2, I was only reimbursed "the max" of $1, Their policy document, in the binder of documentation sent to us, states the "Aggregate Limit of Liability" for plumbing is $5, I was not covered even half that much, yet on this instance I allowed their less than half coverage on this particular instance and also had to scan/email/fax them a receipt stating that it did cost $2,(for their file) but obviously wasn't even covered half that.2) I did receive the check of $1,for the furnace in need of replacement, but I DID NOT "accept" or cash this check yet because in disagreement of their coverage The lowest estimated cost, that I was required by them to personally get quotes for them, was $3,(as previously stated).3) I had to "go out on my own" because I was not able to use "their service" to get contractors to quote/estimate AND fix needed repairs This obviously is time and effort on my part and not a means of including this part in their supposed service In other words, its time and effort on my part rather than allowed use the service that was purchased to do so.4) They stated, "Firstly, the policy only covers repair or replacement of the defective part..." This defective part, as noted from day one, is the furnace IN WHOLE, the entire unite which is approximately years old There was never any "part" specified as this was originally noted to be the entire unit And to note, luckily this house has a multi zone HVAC system (first floor zone/unit and second floor zone/unit) So with that said, we luckily got by so far with only having the one of two furnaces fully functionally work for now (as it is just as old) to "support" the home's heating.5) The history of this claim is fully noted because they are supposedly to mail a check within business days The process obviously took way too long and in addition they required me to do a lot of the "work and effort" The history of the "work" done on this claim is as follows: Day - claim started on February 17th when it was called in Day - spoke with a representative at RWS on February 26th to fully work this out Day - First quote sent to them on March 10th Day - Second quote sent to them on March 13th Day - Third quote sent to them on March 16th Day - email from representative on March 17th that it is being reviewed Day - my wife called on March 23rd to try to follow up and see what was taking so long Day - The check for $1,was dated April 10th (over days from the first call), but not sure when it was sent or exactly when it was received (though obviously received after April 10th)No idea why they sent the check and this specific amount since we did not discuss nor agree on a coverage of the cost with their warranty services, even though I sent many local service quotes to them prior to this Day - called multiple times on April 17th to try and speak with a representative Day - possibly on April 21st the day that the check for only $1,was received Day - April 23rd was just one of many prior times that I had called and was transferred to the manager's voicemail, left a message, yet no call back Day - again, April 24th, transferred to the manager's voicemail, left a message, and still no call backAlso, with each call, I had specifically stated that I left voicemails to the manager and still have not received a call back This was never handled any other way but to continually transfer me to the manager's voicemail Day - the complaint sent to Revdex.com on April 28th Day - the message reply received regarding my complaint on May 6th (business days after complaint sent) Day - this message reply being sent on May 12th regarding my reply to their reply (business days after)6) The policy DOES NOT have any wording to what they cover other than generally stating a listing of "Aggregate Limit of Liability" This is simply read that any quotes received are to be covered because they are under the limit Why was it stated that "...we have no obligation to pay out entirely for every claim we receive.", yet I was required to go out and get these quotes/estimates on my own, per their need to supposedly and properly "run" their business Given that, they should agree with what I was able to come up with and in due time.7) This seems like a typo by them, but they did state "By accepting the cash payment of 51,made on this claim, the claim has been paid, and closed, in accordance with the policy." I obviously did not get a check for $51,but it was for $1, This claim should not have been closed because this was not stated between me and the representative I spoke with numerous times And I do not see anything proper that this all is "in accordance with the policy" One of the main issues, again, is that they can only do "cash payment in lieu of repair/replacement", but it does not suffice This was discussed numerous times with the representative, yet no final conclusion made with regards to the estimates and actual cost required to repair the furnace.Please read through all these items and please come to a proper negotiation for this claim with the lowest estimate ($3,500) that I was able to personally obtain and send for your "service" that is required to fix the furnace Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN 46204- RE: Complaint # [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: [redacted] in regards to her foundation issues The homeowner states that on page of the inspection report is show there are no significant cracks or movement; lines above that it says “see the note(s) under the Structural section of the Addendum Summary starting on AS-1” This is where the inspection report specifically calls out issues with the foundation Again per our warranty terms we do not cover items that were found in an inspection Our warranty is for new mechanical/structural failures after the date of inspection The homeowner states in her Revdex.com response “The $due according to the contract is only a fraction of the cost needed for the inspection missed item repair” With that being said this is not a new structural failure since she is saying that it was missed by the inspector The inspection does call out multiple issues with the foundation We sincerely regret any inconvenience that Ms [redacted] may have experienced with his claim; however, Residential Warranty Services made an exception to typical procedures by covering items that would not normally be covered The check to the homeowner in the amount of $will be issued once the Revdex.com complaint has been resolved Sincerely, [redacted] Director of Warranty Operations Residential Warranty Services, INC www.rwswarranty.com
So I just resigned myself to having been taken by a scam and that I was not going to get paid for the service call or the repair (which to date I have not been paid). I called them and cancelled the policy under the terms of the contract. They told me that I'd get a refund in 30 to 40 days. That was over 2 months ago at this time and still no refund and I can't even get them on the phone now.
If I had known this was the case, I would have progressed immediately to repairing the issue myself instead of having the unit serviced and awaiting approval. Because of this, I have had to go through two additional local freezes in which my heater could not warm my house above 60 degrees F, and spent an Extra $250 getting the unit serviced to their request.
This is an irresponsible way to run a business in this insane housing market when homebuyers have no power to get repairs done prior to closing. It leaves all the risk on the buyer and makes the home warranty included in the purchase absolutely useless. This company should be ashamed of leaving people out in the cold, literally and figuratively.
They denied my claim, saying that I spray cleaning product in the stove, which I did not, even if I did it should be covered. Don't waste your time or money. They are Crooks!
The homeowner has indicated that “the warranty trying [sic] to collect money from me while no work was done on my AC Unit”, which is concerning to RWS due to our having possession of an invoice and multiple communication records between RWS, the homeowner, and the contractor that would indicate otherwiseHowever, for the homeowner's benefit, below is a breakdown of all the items relevant to this claim, at this pointPlease review and reach out if you have any additional questions: Overtime FeesThe homeowner submitted their claim on a Friday and, despite its non-emergency status, insisted on a contractor being dispatched immediately over the weekendWhile RWS does not charge over-time fees, our policy clearly states that a contractor may, for non-emergency claimsThe homeowner was advised of this by both RWS and the contractor yet insisted on the immediate service and so agreed to the overtime charges, the cost of which ($295.00) is due to the contractor immediatelyService Call FeesThe homeowner wanted two HVAC units serviced, which resulted in two service call fees as the policy clearly states that the service call fee applies to each mechanical breakdown, for each distinct malfunction and so multiple service call fees may apply to one claimHowever, later, the homeowner refused to pay the $due, which is grounds for immediate cancellation of his warranty, without possibility of refund, which will be addressed further belowThat cost is due to the contractor immediatelyRepair over ReplacementThe contractor informed the homeowner that one of the units needed to be replaced due to its age, as it would be more expensive to temporarily repair the item over replacing themHe quoted a replacement to the homeowner but the homeowner insisted on immediate service and so insisted on the repairThe contractor explained the risks and expenses of repairing over replacement, and contacted RWS for authorizationAn RWS representative spoke with the homeowner, who insisted he knew the risks and that he still wanted the repairThe contractor was given authorization per the homeowner’s demands and so replaced the capacitor in the older unit and ensured it was working when he leftFreon FeesThe contractor also re-filled the Freon in both units, which resulted in a total of 10lbs of R-refrigerant being added, even though the homeowner’s policy clearly states that the homeowner is responsible for the differences in costs for any refrigerant required other than R-410AThe contractor was informed of this over the phone prior to the repair, yet opted for the repair regardlessThe $cost is due to the contractor immediatelyLeak ChecksIn addition, the homeowner should be aware that leak checks are not covered under his policy, even though he had the contractor conduct two leak checks – one on each unitHowever, in a good faith gesture the contractor did not charge anything for the two hours spent on the leak check, or the labor for the leak check itselfDespite this, the homeowner still refused to pay the contractor for any of the charges the homeowner knew were dueRWS would advise the homeowner to re-read his policy carefully to ensure he is aware of the full extent of his coverageIf he has any questions, he is more than welcome to contact RWS and our trained customer service representatives will be able to explain all covered items to ensure there is no confusionWith regards to this situation, with the repair authorized repeatedly by the homeowner, against the advice of both RWS and the contractor, the homeowner is liable to the Contractor for a total of $The remainder costs will be covered by RWS pursuant to the homeowner’s policyIf the homeowner continues to refuse to pay this amount to the contractor for services already rendered, not only will the contractor have legal remedies against the homeowner, but RWS will be forced to cancel the homeowner’s policy, without refund for failure to pay the applicable fees, pursuant to the cancellation provision of the policyAt this point in time, the homeowner must send a check to the contractor in full payment of the owed amount, and forward proof of the same to RWS by September Failure to do so will result in an immediate cancellation of the homeowner’s policy and any other remedy RWS, or the contractor if they feel so inclined, feels obligated to pursue against the homeowner
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] first of all my repair were to replace leaking cooling coils in units 1-ton heil and 1-ton heil and parts and labor were in excess of RWS was aware of this and I was led to believe they would be sending the maximum amount covered at I was never told anything about a the parts alone were over plus labor for men over RWS is full of [redacted] regarding this amount being over their cost I would be happy to provide written cost of these items I would never agree to allow RWS or anyone associated with them on my propertyI would also, add that they have had other unresolved complaints as per my realtor Realtor refuses to use this company any longer RWS has no customer service and would not even return my phone calls regarding this matterThanks Revdex.com for your assistance in contacting RWS I will proceed to file complaint with state of Tennessee and contact an attorney for advise in filing small claims against RWS I HAVE A CONTRACT AND IT IS ENFORCEABLE I will make known via social media the pitfalls of using RWS as a home warranty companyBUYER BEWARE OF RWS Regards, [redacted]
The homeowner’s termite protection plan covers “new infestations” after the home inspectionThe homeowner filed a claim stating they witnessed termites but, in the estimate they submitted, the contractor only confirmed the home inspection’s previously disclosed findings and there was no indication in the bid that new termite activity had been foundAs a result, the damage appeared to be pre-existing, which precluded coverage and so the claim was deniedAfter the denial was mailed, the homeowner’s home inspector called in and explained to the Director of the Warranty Department that the homeowner had seen new termite activity and he argued their caseThe Director exercised his discretion and had the homeowners’ claim representative call the contractor directly to find out what was going onThe contractor stated that he was unaware the bid was going to a warranty company and so he wrote the bid for the homeowners, leaving out the new infestation signs and the price breakdown requiredAfter speaking with him, it was apparent that the homeowner’s claim was coveredThe contractor told RWS that they would charge $to chemically treat the infected areas, which is what the homeowner's plan covers, and the Director approved the amountAs a result, a check in the amount of $($– the homeowner’s $deductible) was submitted earlier this month and mailed July If the homeowner would like to decline the buyout check, RWS is happy to re-review the claim a second time (with no guarantee that the review will result in a higher buyout amount)To re-open their claim, the homeowner simply needs to VOID and return the buyout check and provide an estimate for chemical treatment of the infected areas only, which is the treatment covered by their warranty, and the claim will be re-opened immediately
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowAs previously stated, the following actions and lack thereof are unacceptable, and would warrant an effort by the company to rectify the situation with the customer, which RWS is refusing to do Never responded to approve or deny my 8/claim recommended repairs - proven in call records Never responded to or even recorded my 8/claim that the unit stopped working and needed urgent attention - proven in call records Never told me they decided to send me a $check for a buyout of my parts (I had to call a week later and learn that myself)- proven in call records Cut the check a week late after they told me themselves that October was the last day they could cut to be in compliance with their day policy Sent a check for much less than the $I was told I would receive, and never communicated this change to me- proven in call records Any business that calls the above actions "going above and beyond for the customer" has some serious soul-searching to do Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle">Re: Complaint ID [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: We are in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his garage door openers Homeowner called in the complaint with the garage door openers on 7/23/@ 12:15:pm stating that all openers were not opening On 7/31/@ 2:pm Our office spoke to the contractor that the homeowner had chosen Our office was told by the contractor that on 7/22/there had been an electrical storm and it looked like the units had been struck by lightning At this point in time we denied his claim On 8/1/@ 4:pm Homeowner called in and said that he contractor was incorrect At this point he was transferred to the claims manager voicemail (she leaves at 4p EST daily) On 8/4/@ 9:am (next business day) The claims manager called, she received MrB [redacted] ’s voicemail and left a message stating that she was returning his call and for him to call her back On 8/7/1:pm The claims manager spoke to the homeowner and MrB [redacted] stated that the lightning storm was after he had filed his claim At this point a copy of the home inspection was requested On 8/8/Our office received a copy of the home inspection On 8/11/11:pm The claims manager called, she received MrB [redacted] ’s voicemail and left a message stating that she had further questions about his claim and to please call back On 8/21/5:pm Received invoice from the contractor that the homeowner chose stating that all motors were bad RWS relayed to Mr B [redacted] that our cost for failed motors on garage doors is $per opener and that there is a deductible ($75) per mechanical failure The warranty states that “Each and every distinct breakdown of any part or component of any covered mechanical system as determined by an authorized contractor constitutes a distinct claim.” The homeowner had separate garage door openers that failed which would require $deductibles The limits of liability #& #state: # “RWS reserves the right to make a cash payment to a policyholder in lieu of repair/replacement for the defective part(s) The payment will reflect RWS negotiated cost for service and may be less than retail.” # RWS shall be responsible only for the costs of installation of a similar part in the case of an obsolete or unavailable part.” We sincerely regret any inconvenience that MrB [redacted] experienced; however, Residential Warranty Services followed the terms of our warranty I have attached the specific pages of the warranty for your reference Sincerely, John S [redacted] Director of Operations Residential Warranty Services
This homeowner, months into a month policy, has received repairs costing 3x the amount the warranty actually cost to obtain and there has been NO money taken from the homeowner as the policy was paid for up front and in fullThis homeowner has profited greatly from her one year warranty with RWS, making it all the more bewildering why she would file a complaint on an issue she personally knew had been resolved beforehand In fall of 2015, the homeowner had a plumbing issue and contacted her own contractor to diagnose the issueThis contractor charged a service call fee; a fee that was unnecessarily spent by the homeowner as she then called RWS to open a claim, which resulted in our own contractor needing to be sent and a deductible owed per the terms of her warranty with usThe homeowner did not contact us about this reimbursement issue until late March 2016, wherein she was immediately contacted by the Director of the Company (on March 2016, the same day she filed this complaint)He spoke with her and told her he would immediately process the requested refund, not out of any obligation but simply out of a want to ensure complete customer satisfaction That same day, the Director honored the conversation and submitted the reimbursementUnfortunately, the homeowner did not and, that same day, knowing what she was told by the Director, filed this complaint regardlessThe homeowner has not been trying to get this resolved since October; the only contact we had with her with regards to this claim have taken place this week and, as stated above, finalized wholly in accordance with the homeowner's desires We here at RWS are saddened that she has so blatantly acted in bad faith - the homeowner was told, directly by the Director of the Company, that he would personally submit the reimbursement for processing yet she still filed a complaint within hours of that conversation falsely claiming a lack of communication and of RWS "giving us the run around"The reimbursement, which we have NO obligation to pay, is currently being processed, as promisedYou will receive it within business days
It is clear this homeowner does not wish to honor the terms of the warranty and that he would rather resort to extorting a company for more money, evident not only by his responses to the Revdex.com but by his contacting a reporter, providing that reporter information, and then insinuating that, unless RWS pays his ransom price, our name will be dragged through the mudThis is unacceptable and abhorrent At this point, the homeowner has clearly declined the previous offer set forth and so the owner of the Company has asked me to offer the homeowner, one final time, the initial offer of $375, no review requiredOf course this final offer is dependent upon this payment settling the issue for goodIf the homeowner accepts this amount, he must respond to the Revdex.com accordingly by noon tomorrow in order for a check to be both processed and mailed tomorrow as any further delay in an acceptance will result in a delay in receiving a check Otherwise, if the homeowner continues to push for more money or otherwise threaten or extort RWS, the original buyout amount of $will be processed and this issue will be litigated elsewhere with the homeowner keeping in mind that he will be held both legally and financially responsible for any damages that occur due to any defamatory statements that are published about our company due to his statements
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved Regards, [redacted] **
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] Regards, [redacted] I am not denying that the company did try and call to get my money back but everything else that was said was a lie they approved the work and told me a check would be mailed I dont have time to set here and make lies up about a company, If they would have explained to me the approval process we wouldnt be here right now
Worst company I have ever dealt with in my lifeNever received my reimbursement check for what I spent over my deductibleEveryone I spoke to gave me different information and lied to meFind ANY other company to deal with other than this oneI spoke to them 15+ times and every time they told me there were zero notes in the system from my previous conversationsEvery person I spoke to said they would call me back and never did onceThey need to be put out of business with how they run their companyAbsolutely embarrassing
RWS has no record of the homeowner calling in about a failed unit or about setting up a claim for a failed unit, which is unusual due to the ample records of the homeowner calling in regarding her A/C tuclaim and the associated buyoutIf the homeowner would provide proof she contacted RWS and filed a claim for her failed unit, we would be happy to re-evaluateOtherwise, as the homeowner had no issue filing a claim previously, as there exist no records of a second claim being filed, and as the homeowner was aware of warranty procedures yet expressly failed to follow them with regards to her A/C replacement (which immediately precludes coverage completely), there is nothing more RWS can do with regards to her failed A/C unitWith regards to the accusations regarding her claim buyout check, RWS has multiple records of conversations with the homeowner regarding her buyout, which the homeowner has mistakenly misreported in her Revdex.com response by stating “no one at RWS bothered to call and say they decided to offer a buyout”This is simply untrue as the homeowner was notified multiple times (including the first business day after she filed her claim when her claim was initially approved, along with each time she called in thereafter) that she would be issued a buyout check, which was currently being processedAt no point was she unaware that she would be receiving a buyout check, though the final amount was not finalized until the entire approval process was completeAs stated previously, the homeowner’s claim consisted of no actual failures, which should have precluded coverage entirely under her warrantyThe homeowner cannot deny this as both she and her contractor have admitted the sameDespite this, RWS went above and beyond their obligations by covering those items which were operating less than perfectly by replacing a ‘weak’ (yet working) blower capacitor and paying for a refrigerant refill due to an ‘indoor coil icing up’ due to ‘low refrigerant’However, it is important the homeowner understand that the above had not failed and so RWS had no obligation to cover any of this claimTo claim that RWS should also cover all of the ‘recommended repairs’, despite the existence of no failures, including a ‘coil replacement’ that the contractor had already stated could be repaired with a Freon refill (which was covered), is simply impossibleTherefore, as RWS has stated earlier, “unless the homeowner has additional information that would change the circumstances or information already received, the homeowner is due no additional money and this claim remains closed”
Residential Warranty Services (RWS) has multiple complaints and bad reviewsIn good conscience, cannot recommend RWS for any warranty servicesRealtors and inspection companies should be warned against RWS warrantiesIn an initial home inspection, both the home and pest inspection companies noted past termite damage on the property with small probability of current termite issuesThe home inspector allowed the property to pass inspection with the condition that RWS would cover any inspection issues within a 90-day warranty periodWithin days, the original pest inspection company confirmed evidence of live termitesRWS did not honor their warranty agreement thru the home inspection companyAs such, the home owners worked directly with RWS and their recommended pest inspection companyRWS tried repeatedly to refute their own contracted pest company recommendations for treatmentRWS originally offered to partially cover the cost of a surface treatment not allowed by the stateTo resolve the treatment dispute, the pest inspection company wrote a formal letter and email stating that they could not perform the treatment mandated by RWSThe claim process took months (8/18/- 11/7/16)The process included over emails, phone calls, and written correspondence from RWS contracted pest control company for Residential Warranty Service to only cover 40% of the pest control costs
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowActually none of my questions are addressed by RWSThis company is running a borderline scam Yes, I was told ONLY RWS will assign the contractorCan you imagine someone living in Mason, OH will get a contractor from someone Columbus, OHThey have assigned the service contractor No Freon was addedYou would think, if they added Freon, they would list the price of the FreonOnly deductible is mentioned in the priceAlso, I contacted the service guy and he said he only added very little Freon just to start the systemThe service guys are probably the best in using grammar and instead of saying need adding, they said addedAlso, I had a subsequent diagnosis done, and the new service contractor needed to add FreonRWS is running a scam on this subjectCan they show the invoice where the service guy showed the price of the Freon they added The RWS claim lady said some very unprofessional stuffShe definitely told me that she has video proofMy demand is RWS fixes the issue and deductible will be paid Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below In response to each of their individual statements in their message, I have come up with a response to each piece that is not accurate according to their business documentation and the way they function.The claim was NOT justly handled under their terms Their terms are very vague and not defined with what they seem to have just stated; they do not discuss great detail per claim in their coverage binder.1) On a claim to be covered in their state (Indiana) most likely does not meet the cost of a claim to be covered in my state (New Jersey) In essence, the cost of parts & labor in the state of New Jersey is most likely more expensive than other states, and I'm sure New Jersey is not the same nor cheaper claim cost than Indiana may be A great example is one previous claim regarding our hot water heater The cost to replace was $2, I was only reimbursed "the max" of $1, Their policy document, in the binder of documentation sent to us, states the "Aggregate Limit of Liability" for plumbing is $5, I was not covered even half that much, yet on this instance I allowed their less than half coverage on this particular instance and also had to scan/email/fax them a receipt stating that it did cost $2,(for their file) but obviously wasn't even covered half that.2) I did receive the check of $1,for the furnace in need of replacement, but I DID NOT "accept" or cash this check yet because in disagreement of their coverage The lowest estimated cost, that I was required by them to personally get quotes for them, was $3,(as previously stated).3) I had to "go out on my own" because I was not able to use "their service" to get contractors to quote/estimate AND fix needed repairs This obviously is time and effort on my part and not a means of including this part in their supposed service In other words, its time and effort on my part rather than allowed use the service that was purchased to do so.4) They stated, "Firstly, the policy only covers repair or replacement of the defective part..." This defective part, as noted from day one, is the furnace IN WHOLE, the entire unite which is approximately years old There was never any "part" specified as this was originally noted to be the entire unit And to note, luckily this house has a multi zone HVAC system (first floor zone/unit and second floor zone/unit) So with that said, we luckily got by so far with only having the one of two furnaces fully functionally work for now (as it is just as old) to "support" the home's heating.5) The history of this claim is fully noted because they are supposedly to mail a check within business days The process obviously took way too long and in addition they required me to do a lot of the "work and effort" The history of the "work" done on this claim is as follows: Day - claim started on February 17th when it was called in Day - spoke with a representative at RWS on February 26th to fully work this out Day - First quote sent to them on March 10th Day - Second quote sent to them on March 13th Day - Third quote sent to them on March 16th Day - email from representative on March 17th that it is being reviewed Day - my wife called on March 23rd to try to follow up and see what was taking so long Day - The check for $1,was dated April 10th (over days from the first call), but not sure when it was sent or exactly when it was received (though obviously received after April 10th)No idea why they sent the check and this specific amount since we did not discuss nor agree on a coverage of the cost with their warranty services, even though I sent many local service quotes to them prior to this Day - called multiple times on April 17th to try and speak with a representative Day - possibly on April 21st the day that the check for only $1,was received Day - April 23rd was just one of many prior times that I had called and was transferred to the manager's voicemail, left a message, yet no call back Day - again, April 24th, transferred to the manager's voicemail, left a message, and still no call backAlso, with each call, I had specifically stated that I left voicemails to the manager and still have not received a call back This was never handled any other way but to continually transfer me to the manager's voicemail Day - the complaint sent to Revdex.com on April 28th Day - the message reply received regarding my complaint on May 6th (business days after complaint sent) Day - this message reply being sent on May 12th regarding my reply to their reply (business days after)6) The policy DOES NOT have any wording to what they cover other than generally stating a listing of "Aggregate Limit of Liability" This is simply read that any quotes received are to be covered because they are under the limit Why was it stated that "...we have no obligation to pay out entirely for every claim we receive.", yet I was required to go out and get these quotes/estimates on my own, per their need to supposedly and properly "run" their business Given that, they should agree with what I was able to come up with and in due time.7) This seems like a typo by them, but they did state "By accepting the cash payment of 51,made on this claim, the claim has been paid, and closed, in accordance with the policy." I obviously did not get a check for $51,but it was for $1, This claim should not have been closed because this was not stated between me and the representative I spoke with numerous times And I do not see anything proper that this all is "in accordance with the policy" One of the main issues, again, is that they can only do "cash payment in lieu of repair/replacement", but it does not suffice This was discussed numerous times with the representative, yet no final conclusion made with regards to the estimates and actual cost required to repair the furnace.Please read through all these items and please come to a proper negotiation for this claim with the lowest estimate ($3,500) that I was able to personally obtain and send for your "service" that is required to fix the furnace Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN 46204- RE: Complaint # [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: [redacted] in regards to her foundation issues The homeowner states that on page of the inspection report is show there are no significant cracks or movement; lines above that it says “see the note(s) under the Structural section of the Addendum Summary starting on AS-1” This is where the inspection report specifically calls out issues with the foundation Again per our warranty terms we do not cover items that were found in an inspection Our warranty is for new mechanical/structural failures after the date of inspection The homeowner states in her Revdex.com response “The $due according to the contract is only a fraction of the cost needed for the inspection missed item repair” With that being said this is not a new structural failure since she is saying that it was missed by the inspector The inspection does call out multiple issues with the foundation We sincerely regret any inconvenience that Ms [redacted] may have experienced with his claim; however, Residential Warranty Services made an exception to typical procedures by covering items that would not normally be covered The check to the homeowner in the amount of $will be issued once the Revdex.com complaint has been resolved Sincerely, [redacted] Director of Warranty Operations Residential Warranty Services, INC www.rwswarranty.com