Dear Sir or Madam: On behalf of Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”), please accept this letter in response to the follinquiry submitted on behalf of the Complainant regarding her extended service plan (“the Plan”)In a rebuttal to our response dated 12/22/15, the Complainant contends we have not resolved her initial complaint that her claim has been incorrectly denied by SNW and the terms and conditions of the Plan were misrepresentedWhen purchasing the Plan on ***.com, the Complainant was provided an opportunity on the website to review the Plan’s term and conditions prior to its purchaseAt the time of purchase, the Complainant was provided with the Plan’s terms and conditions for her notebook computer(s)The Complainant again was provided with a copy of the Plan’s terms and conditions on November 30, 2014, by SNWIn addition, the ***.com website did inform the Complainant under the tab and section titled “Specifications” of when the Plan’s Coverage Starts which showed “Date of Equipment Purchase”, in this particular case it was the day prior to the Plan’s purchased date, as explained in SNW’s prior responseThe same tab and section also discloses the Plan’s Coverage Length of “Years”The Plan’s terms and conditions, provided to the Complainant by SNW on two separate occasions, includes a face page called the “Certificate of Coverage” that clearly identifies the Plan’s Effective Date and Expiration DateThe Complainant’s Certificate of Coverage documents the effective date as 11/9/and expiration date as 11/9/In SNW’s previous response it indicated that the Complainant was advised on 12/15/that coverage under Plan number *** had expired on 11/9/15, and no coverage was available for the notebook computerThis response has not changed to dateThe Complainant’s Certificate of Coverage for the Plan includes the following statement: “Parts and service currently covered under the manufacturer’s warranty will be provided by the manufacturer.” Then it goes on to say: “Please read this Certificate of Coverage carefully.” In review of the Plan’s terms and conditions, please refer to Section LIMITATIONS OF COVERAGE subsection K, which together states: “This Contract Does Not Cover: In-warranty parts not provided or shipped by the manufacturerOperational or mechanical failure covered by manufacturer’s warranty, manufacturer’s recall, improper constructions, or factory bulletins, (regardless of whether or not the manufacturer is doing business as an ongoing enterprise)Defects in the equipment due to the manufacturer’s error or improper construction of the equipment.” However, as previously explained in SNW’s letter of 12/22/15, there are exceptions to subsection K in which the Plan may provide for covered repairs during the manufacturer’s warranty period only if the coverage is purchasedExamples of these exceptions can be found under the terms and conditions section WHAT IS COVERED, subsection Power Surge and Spike and section ACCIDENTAL DAMAGE FROM HANDLING (ADH)The Plan also includes section CANCELLATION AND REFUND which SNW previously mentioned in our response allowing the Complainant to cancel the Plan within the specified time period of sixty (60) days and receive a full refund if she did not agree with the terms and conditions of the PlanSection COVERAGE AND TERM in the Plan further reiterates to the Complainant that the expiration date is located on the face of the Plan - Certificate of Coverage, some limitations of coverage are contained in the Plan, and she should review the limitations of coverage paragraph for detailsAfter review of the rebuttal complaint, we did not find any new information provided by the Complainant establishing misleading or misrepresented informationSNW maintains its position that: (1) the details of the Plan were represented and advertised accurately; and (2) the extended service plan *** expired on 11/9/and no coverage is available to the Complainant for the notebook computerTherefore, SNW is not in the position to offer a refund to the Complainant as requested to reimburse her for the amount paid for purchase of the PlanI trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely, *** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This is the exact response--word for word-- the business sent on 5-13-I rejected the response on 5-13-I am rejecting the response againAs of 5-17-16, days since I filed a claim, my refrigerator has not been repaired, replaced or bought out.
Regards,
*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the RevDex.com regarding his *** Service Contract (“the Plan”)The Complainant requests that he either receives a replacement unit or a buyout equal to 75% of the original purchase price. Our records reflect that on April 25, 2016, the Complainant initiated a claim for his refrigerator unit due to the freezer not cooling properly and water leakage in the interior part of the unitDue to the Complainant’s residence being located in a remote area of SNW’s service provider network, there was a brief delay in obtaining a service provider to accept the claimOn April 28, 2016, the claim was referred to *** *** to diagnose the appliance and complete the repairs.On May 4, 2016, *** *** advised SNW that the unit is repairable. Specifically, *** *** indicated that it was a sealed system issue and the compressor needed replacementHowever, *** *** is not factory authorized to perform repairs on sealed systems as required by the manufacturer and therefore could not complete the repairs neededSNW then began searching expeditiously for a factory authorized service provider who can order the necessary parts and complete the sealed system repairsAt this time, the conditions under the Plan for a replacement or buyout have not been met given that the product is repairable.On May 12, 2016, SNW was able to contact *** Factory Services (“***”) who accepted the claim*** is factory authorized and will be able to complete the necessary repairs on the unitWe apologize for any inconvenience caused by this delay in locating a servicer willing to accept assignment of this service call in the Complainant’s area and who is factory authorized to complete the particulardiagnosed repairs.I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number.Sincerely,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11739363, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Despite the claims provided by AIG in their response, the original contract that was purchased with my appliance specifically states "5-Year Extended Service Plan." I'm not sure how anyone would interpret a 5-year extended plan to mean, one-year concurrent and 4-years extended Additionally, the price I paid for my contract, and what is reflected in the contract document provided by AIG, does not match I paid $for the 5-year contract at the tine of purchase and AIG's contract price indicates $289.30.I feel that AIG (and/or the original contract provider) are employing slimy tactics in an effort to avoid providing the fifth year of coverage that is due Please see the attached original order receipt and incorrect AIG contract document as verification. I would like a correction to be made to my service contract that reflects what I actually paid for
Regards,
Michael Underwood
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
they did not contact me nor did they leave me messages I called them may times and received no responseWas told a manager would contact me and never would
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam: On behalf of Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”), we are responding to your follow up request dated March 7, 2016, with a payment update regarding a claim filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding a Service Contract (“the Plan”) purchased from ***The Complainant asserts that payment has not been receivedOur records reflect the wireless modem was received from complainant on February 23, 2016, and payment for the shipping reimbursement cost was issued in the amount of $on March 1, 2016, via check no***Additionally, on March 9, 2016, customer service informed the Complainant that a check would be issued and mailed on March 15, and would arrive within to business days from the mailing datePayment for the wireless modem was issued on March 15, 2016, in the amount of $166.99, via check no***This amount represents the full retail price of the wireless modemShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely, *** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have never stated that my television was making any kind of noise from the date of purchaseI would have called the manufacturer right away or would have returned it Calls are monitored and recorded so they should be able to have all the information. Regards,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
As I stated in my original complaint the WiFi connectivity issue is one that even the manufacturer, ***, admits to on their websiteIt is an issue that I reproduce withing minutes of being connected to the internetThe laptop losses single for a few minutes then reconnects again. I beleive Service Net did not perform an adequate test if at allI would like to see the results of their testing to better crophend the procedure they used and determine whether it is valid
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam:
New Hampshire Insurance Company ("NHIC") has completed a review of the above-captioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her son’s Wireless Communications Equipment Insurance Policy ("the Policy")SNW Insurance
Agency, LLC ("SNW") is the administrator handling this claim on behalf of NHICThe Complainant requests that a replacement phone of the same make and model as the damaged product be provided
Our records reflect that on May 8, 2015, a claim was initiated for the damaged phone, which had a cracked screenOn May 13, 2015, the replacement phone was delivered and instructions were given to ship the damaged phone in the provided prepaid box to Green Stream, the asset recovery centerGreen Stream received the damaged phone and it was salvagedThis is standard procedure since the replacement product had already been successfully delivered
On June 1, 2015, the Complainant called to advise that although the replacement phone has been received, it was defectiveThe issue was escalated to Green Steam in order to provide a new replacement phoneBetween June 6, 2015, and June 9, 2015, both the Complainant and the customer’s father, *** ***, called to state that they thought the replacement phone sent, a Motorola Moto X, was a loaner phone, and the Complainant requested to have the original phone returnedBoth were advised that the Policy is for replacement only and that no loaner phones are providedThe original phone had been salvaged, as mentioned aboveAn update was requested from Green Steam regarding the previously requested replacement phone
On June 13, 2015, and June 16, 2015, Mr*** called to state that the replacement phone’s retail value was less than that of the originally purchased phone, a Samsung Galaxy SMr*** was advised that a replacement phone is determined by technical specifications similar to those of the original product per section VIII of the Policy, not the retail priceA new replacement Motorola Moto X phone was delivered on June 12,
Furthermore, the Complainant contends that during the course of the claim, she was advised that a deductible of $or $would be applied instead of the $deductible which was actually appliedPer section VII of the Policy, $is the correct deductible amount for the original product
Upon review of the calls and notes related to this claim, it was determined that no misinformation was provided regarding the deductible and a promise of a loaner phone was never given
I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
I am pleased in that AIG along with *** has issued be a buyout at 75% of the purchase price of the refrigerator which I have acceptedMy complaint has been resolved to my satisfaction
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Please accept this response to your e-mail dated November 26, *** regarding the consumer complaint filed by Ms
*** with the Revdex.com, Inc (“KY Revdex.com”)The complaint was filed in relation to the repair of a Netbook/Notebook submitted under a Service Contract administered by Service Net Solutions, LLC(“Service Net”) on behalf of* ***)As a matter of background Ms*** contacted Service Net to report an issue with her Notebook adapter on July 31, ***The unit was assigned to a service provider, repaired, and returned to Ms*** October 16, ***Shortly thereafter, Ms*** reported another issue with the unit, which was repaired (logic board was replace) on November 20, ***On December 13, ***, Ms*** contacted Service Net and stated that the repair was not successful; specifically, the Windows updates on her unit were not workingService Net referred Ms*** to the manufacturer because the reported Windows update problem related to the computer software, and not covered under the service contractOn June 12, *** Ms*** contacted Service Net and stated that the manufacturer could not resolve the issue, and she was also having issues with the speaker/headphones on the unitThe unit was repaired (transfer cable was replaced) on July 10, ***On September 12, *** Ms*** contacted Service Net again and reported issues with the computer shutting downBased on the original cost of the unit and the total cost of prior repairs, there was not sufficient funds under the contract to continue service of the unitTherefore, Service Net offered the remaining balance of $under the service contract to Ms*** as an alternate solutionMs*** accepted the buyout on September 19, *** and subsequently filed a complaint with KY Revdex.comIn response to the complaint, Service Net assigned a service provider to address the software issueThe service provider received the unit for repairs from Ms*** ???on October 16, *** and parts ordered for the repairs/software were received on October 29, However, the software was not compatible with the original software on Ms***’s unit, so it was re-orderedOn October 30, *** we advised the KY Revdex.com that Service Net was working with Ms*** and the service provider to address the issueThe final repair of the unit was completed on November 26, ***.Please note that Ms*** has a work of warranty period of days from the date of the repairs, where an alternate solution can be provided if the repair is unsuccessfulOnce the work of warranty period expires, no further resolution will be offered to Ms*** as the service contract will be considered fulfilledWe hope we have responded to your inquiryPlease contact me if you have any questions regarding this fileThank youSincerely,
*** ** ***%
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *** and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This response is a description of the timeline of eventsI have already stated this as well as provided documentationMy issues is that this computer is a lemonThe computer has not been fixedThis company is clumping all the problems and non-fixed events into one to avoid the Lemon Law
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam: Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding his Service Contract (“the Plan”) purchased through ***.comThe Complainant contends that his computer is still
experiencing issues despite multiple repair attemptsAdditionally, the Complainant contends that there has been a delay in initiating the most recent repair request. Our records reflect that on August 26, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for his laptop computer in connection with audio loss and mouse track pad failureAfter the Complainant completed triage support for the computer on October 6, 2015, it was determined the unit needed to be shipped in for repairThe claim was subsequently referred to ** Services for repairOn October 29, 2015, ** Services received the unit and completed the repair on the same dayThe unit’s hard drive was replaced and the Complainant was advised to complete a full system restore with the recovery discs** Services also noted internally that the unit was received with missing screws but this was not interfering with functionalityThe computer was then returned to the Complainant On November 11, 2015, a rework order was initiated and assigned to ** Services to repair the missing back plate screwsA claim is considered a rework order if the service provider is required to repair the unit within days of the last service repair date regarding the same issueOn December 4, 2015, ** Services received the unit to complete the repairHowever, ** Services noticed that the Complainant had not yet completed the full system restore as advised after the original repair** Services returned the unit on the same day and again advised the Complainant to complete the full system restore with recovery software or the unit would not function properly.On December 28, 2015, ** Services received a second rework order as the Complainant indicated the unit was not functioning properly due to a faulty ribbon cableAfter performing a diagnostic test, ** Services determined that the issues causing the unit’s improper functionality were missing drivers and the fact a system restore had still not been completed** Services replaced the hard drive as a precaution and advised the Complainant once more to perform a full system restore with the recovery software. On January 16, 2016, the Complainant reported an issue with the unit’s flex cable/tape and indicated that the computer was not repaired correctlyOn February 4, 2016, ** Services advised SNW that the Complainant was opening the case of the computer which voids the Plan** Services subsequently received the third rework order for the unit on February 26, Between March 1, 2016, and March 15, 2016, ** Services has made four attempts to reach the Complainant by phone to begin the service repair and a voicemail message was left in each instance** Services has not received any response to date from the Complainant.Upon receipt of the complaint, SNW reviewed whether the computer qualified as a lemon under the PlanHowever, it has been determined that the computer cannot be considered for the NO LEMON GUARANTEE since, according to Section of the Plan, a product must undergo three separate service repairs for the same part each time, with three separate claim numbers, which requires a service repair or part replacement under a fourth claim number In this case, as noted above, there has only been one claim for the computer with three rework orders, which do not count as separate claimsSNW recommends that the Complainant speak with ** Services regarding any outstanding issues and, if necessary, submit the unit for further repair. I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number. Sincerely,*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC ("SNW") has completed a review of the above-captioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her Repair Coverage Service Plan ("the Plan")The Complainant contends that a refund should be provided for her defective
computer
Our records reflect that on April 28, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for her computer and indicated that the video card would go out and the unit displayed a blue screen upon restartThe Complainant advised that this issue has happened before and believes the unit is a lemonSNW advised that because this was the first claim initiated under the Plan, the unit would not qualify as a lemonThe claim was referred to ** *** for serviceThe repair was completed on May 5, 2015, and the unit was shipped back to the Complainant
On May 8, 2015, the Complainant contacted SNW and stated the computer was still experiencing issues** *** was contacted and accepted the rework** *** subsequently performed diagnostic testing and found no issuesThe unit was returned to the customer on May 18,
Between May 20, 2015, and July 13, 2015, the Complainant contacted SNW each time she received the computer back from ** *** (three separate occasions), indicating that the issues still remainedIn each instance, the unit was sent back to ** *** for further testingA new claim was not initiated because each repair was within the servicer’s rework period
During the most recent repair, ** *** could not duplicate the issues stated by the Complainant** *** advised that the Complainant should not reload *** a game sharing software, and then complete a full system restore using the OEM recovery software that came with the computer** *** indicated that the *** software commonly overloads computers and causes systems to display a blue screen error and/or shut down, which are the symptoms the Complainant stated were occurringSNW relayed this information to the Complainant and advised that the unit would not qualify for an alternate solution at this time since software issues are not covered, per Section 11.D of the PlanAdditionally, the computer cannot be considered for the No Lemon Guarantee since, according to Section of the Plan, a product must undergo three separate service repairs for the same part, with three separate claim numbers, which requires a repair under a fourth claim numberIn this case, as noted above, only one claim is on record because each repair remained within ** ***’ rework period
Should the issues continue after the *** software is not reloaded to the computer and the full system restore completed, the unit can be sent back to ** *** for diagnostic testing and repair of any mechanical issues
I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number
Sincerely,
*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her Extended Warranty Contract (“the Plan”)The Complainant contends that her refrigerator is still in need of repair and qualifies
for a new unit, or reimbursement under the PlanOur records reflect that on September 18, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for her refrigerator, indicating that the unit was not coolingThe claim was referred to Video Tech Center and on September 25, 2015, as reported by the Complainant, an onsite servicer diagnosed the issue as a fan issue, and that the servicer would return on September 29, On September 26, 2015, a Food Loss Coverage form was sent to the customerOn September 28, 2015, as reported by the Complainant, the servicer rescheduled the September 29, service appointment to October 2, Subsequently, the Complainant contacted SNW to request a new servicerAt this time, it was explained to the Complainant that cancelling and rescheduling a new servicer would delay the processThe Complainant was advised that she could locate her own service provider, pay out of pocket, and then submit to SNW for reimbursement of covered expenses up to the Plans claim limitThe Complainant instructed SNW that she would wait for the October 2, 2015, appointmentOn October 2, 2015, the servicer removed the ice buiand steamed out the fan, resulting in a fully functional unitOn October 16, 2015, the Complainant advised SNW that her unit was not cooling and that the door opened on its ownA rework request was forwarded to Video Tech Center and the servicer attended to the unit on October 23, An authorization request for the door gasket and the controller was received and approved by SNW on October 28, On November 18, the servicer attended an onsite repair of the unitThe Complainant contacted SNW on November 18, 2015, and indicated that the servicer advised that the door would need to be completely replaced and that the freezer was no longer workingSNW received an authorization request for the door on November 23, On November 24, 2015, Video Tech Center contacted SNW reporting that the door is on extended backorder until January 5, 2016. On November 30, 2015, the Complainant was offered, and accepted, a buyout from SNW in the amount of $Payment will be issued, via check, to the Complainant in the amount of $Additionally, the Complainant may be reimbursed up to $for food loss upon receipt of the completed Food Loss Coverage formThe Plan states: Food Loss: You will be reimbursed for food losses resulting from the operational or mechanical failure of Your refrigerator or freezer up to $per appliance over the life of the service ContractThis amount will be applied towards the maximum liability of this Contract I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely,See attachments for original response
Revdex.com:
Once we actually receive the final payment of $85, I will notify Revdex.com that I am satisfied and this claim can be closed Until then, please keep it open In reference to complaint ID ***, once the business performs this action and, if it does,then it's over
Regards,
*** ***
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I have confirmed that the refund amounts have been sent to the credit cards used for payment, and I consider this complaint resolved, with reservation.In the warranty company's response, it was noted that the warranty company never received notice that *** would not complete the repair for the warranty companyThis is falseAfter I contacted *** to verify the service appointment date and time (since there was a "glitch" the last time the warranty company was supposed to set up a service call), *** informed me that they were refusing to perform the work for the warranty companyI personally called the warranty company immediately afterward and informed the warranty company that *** would not perform the serviceThe warranty company told me that I was required to give them days in which they could search the internet for a company in my area willing to perform the service, and if no such company could be located, the warranty company could refund the warranty feeI was specifically told by a representative of the warranty company to give them daysTHIS is why no further contact was made until December The warranty company claims to have no record of my additional contact, but I can't keep notes for them - their representatives failed to properly update the account notes and failed to follow up with fulfilling their role in securing warranty serviceIn addition, when I requested the refund from supervisor *** ***, he promised to personally follow up with me within business days regarding the refundHe failed to fulfill this promise. While I am glad to have a refund of the amount I paid for the warranty, I still feel that the warranty company breached the contract and legitimately attempted consumer fraudIn my opinion, this does not warrant an A rating from the Revdex.com.
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam:AIG WarrantyGuard, Inc(“AIGWG”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the RevDex.com regarding three *** Service Contracts (“the Plan[s]”)The Complainant contends that there has been a
delay in cancelling the Plans and issuing refunds.Our records reflect that on March 30, 2016, the Complainant purchased three Plans for three separate home appliances: a refrigerator (Plan ***), dishwasher (Plan ***), and range (Plan ***)The Plans were purchased with an agreement from the Complainant to make four separate, monthly payments of $On March 30, 2016, and April 30, 2016, the first and second payments were collected for the Plans.On May 4, 2016, the Complainant contacted AIGWG to request the cancellation of the three Plans, indicating that he was not looking for individual service contracts for each appliance, but instead was under the impression he had purchased a full scope home warrantyAIGWG began to process the Complainant’s cancellation requests on this date. However, the Complainant had initiated a claim for repair on Plan *** on May 3, 2016, for his dishwasher indicating the unit was not cleaning on the onehour cycle and the clean light was no longer lighting upThe claim was assigned to service provider *** Factory Service (***) and a service appointment was scheduled for May 17, On May 13, 2016, AIGWG received the service order back from *** stating the Complainant cancelled the service repair on the unit.On May 13, 2016, AIGWG contacted the Complainant to follon the service repair cancellationDuring this call, the Complainant stated that he had cancelled all three Plans on May 4, Since Plan *** had a pending claim for service initiated by the Complainant on May 3, 2016, this Plan was not cancelled on May 4, After speaking with the Complainant on May 13, 2016, AIGWG escalated cancellation on Plan *** along with the refunds requested for the payment amounts that were collected for the Plans on March 30, 2016, and April 30, 2016.On May 27, 2016, AIGWG confirmed that all Plan cancellations and subsequent refunds for the Complainant were processed and issued back to the Complainant’s credit card on recordThe Complainant can expect to see two individual credits each in the amount of $on his credit card statement once the funds are posted to his account.I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number.Sincerely,*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam: On behalf of Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”), please accept this letter in response to the follinquiry submitted on behalf of the Complainant regarding her extended service plan (“the Plan”)In a rebuttal to our response dated 12/22/15, the Complainant contends we have not resolved her initial complaint that her claim has been incorrectly denied by SNW and the terms and conditions of the Plan were misrepresentedWhen purchasing the Plan on ***.com, the Complainant was provided an opportunity on the website to review the Plan’s term and conditions prior to its purchaseAt the time of purchase, the Complainant was provided with the Plan’s terms and conditions for her notebook computer(s)The Complainant again was provided with a copy of the Plan’s terms and conditions on November 30, 2014, by SNWIn addition, the ***.com website did inform the Complainant under the tab and section titled “Specifications” of when the Plan’s Coverage Starts which showed “Date of Equipment Purchase”, in this particular case it was the day prior to the Plan’s purchased date, as explained in SNW’s prior responseThe same tab and section also discloses the Plan’s Coverage Length of “Years”The Plan’s terms and conditions, provided to the Complainant by SNW on two separate occasions, includes a face page called the “Certificate of Coverage” that clearly identifies the Plan’s Effective Date and Expiration DateThe Complainant’s Certificate of Coverage documents the effective date as 11/9/and expiration date as 11/9/In SNW’s previous response it indicated that the Complainant was advised on 12/15/that coverage under Plan number *** had expired on 11/9/15, and no coverage was available for the notebook computerThis response has not changed to dateThe Complainant’s Certificate of Coverage for the Plan includes the following statement: “Parts and service currently covered under the manufacturer’s warranty will be provided by the manufacturer.” Then it goes on to say: “Please read this Certificate of Coverage carefully.” In review of the Plan’s terms and conditions, please refer to Section LIMITATIONS OF COVERAGE subsection K, which together states: “This Contract Does Not Cover: In-warranty parts not provided or shipped by the manufacturerOperational or mechanical failure covered by manufacturer’s warranty, manufacturer’s recall, improper constructions, or factory bulletins, (regardless of whether or not the manufacturer is doing business as an ongoing enterprise)Defects in the equipment due to the manufacturer’s error or improper construction of the equipment.” However, as previously explained in SNW’s letter of 12/22/15, there are exceptions to subsection K in which the Plan may provide for covered repairs during the manufacturer’s warranty period only if the coverage is purchasedExamples of these exceptions can be found under the terms and conditions section WHAT IS COVERED, subsection Power Surge and Spike and section ACCIDENTAL DAMAGE FROM HANDLING (ADH)The Plan also includes section CANCELLATION AND REFUND which SNW previously mentioned in our response allowing the Complainant to cancel the Plan within the specified time period of sixty (60) days and receive a full refund if she did not agree with the terms and conditions of the PlanSection COVERAGE AND TERM in the Plan further reiterates to the Complainant that the expiration date is located on the face of the Plan - Certificate of Coverage, some limitations of coverage are contained in the Plan, and she should review the limitations of coverage paragraph for detailsAfter review of the rebuttal complaint, we did not find any new information provided by the Complainant establishing misleading or misrepresented informationSNW maintains its position that: (1) the details of the Plan were represented and advertised accurately; and (2) the extended service plan *** expired on 11/9/and no coverage is available to the Complainant for the notebook computerTherefore, SNW is not in the position to offer a refund to the Complainant as requested to reimburse her for the amount paid for purchase of the PlanI trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely, *** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This is the exact response--word for word-- the business sent on 5-13-I rejected the response on 5-13-I am rejecting the response againAs of 5-17-16, days since I filed a claim, my refrigerator has not been repaired, replaced or bought out.
Regards,
*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the RevDex.com regarding his *** Service Contract (“the Plan”)The Complainant requests that he either receives a replacement unit or a buyout equal to 75% of the original purchase price. Our records reflect that on April 25, 2016, the Complainant initiated a claim for his refrigerator unit due to the freezer not cooling properly and water leakage in the interior part of the unitDue to the Complainant’s residence being located in a remote area of SNW’s service provider network, there was a brief delay in obtaining a service provider to accept the claimOn April 28, 2016, the claim was referred to *** *** to diagnose the appliance and complete the repairs.On May 4, 2016, *** *** advised SNW that the unit is repairable. Specifically, *** *** indicated that it was a sealed system issue and the compressor needed replacementHowever, *** *** is not factory authorized to perform repairs on sealed systems as required by the manufacturer and therefore could not complete the repairs neededSNW then began searching expeditiously for a factory authorized service provider who can order the necessary parts and complete the sealed system repairsAt this time, the conditions under the Plan for a replacement or buyout have not been met given that the product is repairable.On May 12, 2016, SNW was able to contact *** Factory Services (“***”) who accepted the claim*** is factory authorized and will be able to complete the necessary repairs on the unitWe apologize for any inconvenience caused by this delay in locating a servicer willing to accept assignment of this service call in the Complainant’s area and who is factory authorized to complete the particulardiagnosed repairs.I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number.Sincerely,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11739363, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Despite the claims provided by AIG in their response, the original contract that was purchased with my appliance specifically states "5-Year Extended Service Plan." I'm not sure how anyone would interpret a 5-year extended plan to mean, one-year concurrent and 4-years extended Additionally, the price I paid for my contract, and what is reflected in the contract document provided by AIG, does not match I paid $for the 5-year contract at the tine of purchase and AIG's contract price indicates $289.30.I feel that AIG (and/or the original contract provider) are employing slimy tactics in an effort to avoid providing the fifth year of coverage that is due Please see the attached original order receipt and incorrect AIG contract document as verification. I would like a correction to be made to my service contract that reflects what I actually paid for
Regards,
Michael Underwood
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
they did not contact me nor did they leave me messages I called them may times and received no responseWas told a manager would contact me and never would
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam: On behalf of Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”), we are responding to your follow up request dated March 7, 2016, with a payment update regarding a claim filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding a Service Contract (“the Plan”) purchased from ***The Complainant asserts that payment has not been receivedOur records reflect the wireless modem was received from complainant on February 23, 2016, and payment for the shipping reimbursement cost was issued in the amount of $on March 1, 2016, via check no***Additionally, on March 9, 2016, customer service informed the Complainant that a check would be issued and mailed on March 15, and would arrive within to business days from the mailing datePayment for the wireless modem was issued on March 15, 2016, in the amount of $166.99, via check no***This amount represents the full retail price of the wireless modemShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely, *** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have never stated that my television was making any kind of noise from the date of purchaseI would have called the manufacturer right away or would have returned it Calls are monitored and recorded so they should be able to have all the information. Regards,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
As I stated in my original complaint the WiFi connectivity issue is one that even the manufacturer, ***, admits to on their websiteIt is an issue that I reproduce withing minutes of being connected to the internetThe laptop losses single for a few minutes then reconnects again. I beleive Service Net did not perform an adequate test if at allI would like to see the results of their testing to better crophend the procedure they used and determine whether it is valid
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam:
New Hampshire Insurance Company ("NHIC") has completed a review of the above-captioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her son’s Wireless Communications Equipment Insurance Policy ("the Policy")SNW Insurance
Agency, LLC ("SNW") is the administrator handling this claim on behalf of NHICThe Complainant requests that a replacement phone of the same make and model as the damaged product be provided
Our records reflect that on May 8, 2015, a claim was initiated for the damaged phone, which had a cracked screenOn May 13, 2015, the replacement phone was delivered and instructions were given to ship the damaged phone in the provided prepaid box to Green Stream, the asset recovery centerGreen Stream received the damaged phone and it was salvagedThis is standard procedure since the replacement product had already been successfully delivered
On June 1, 2015, the Complainant called to advise that although the replacement phone has been received, it was defectiveThe issue was escalated to Green Steam in order to provide a new replacement phoneBetween June 6, 2015, and June 9, 2015, both the Complainant and the customer’s father, *** ***, called to state that they thought the replacement phone sent, a Motorola Moto X, was a loaner phone, and the Complainant requested to have the original phone returnedBoth were advised that the Policy is for replacement only and that no loaner phones are providedThe original phone had been salvaged, as mentioned aboveAn update was requested from Green Steam regarding the previously requested replacement phone
On June 13, 2015, and June 16, 2015, Mr*** called to state that the replacement phone’s retail value was less than that of the originally purchased phone, a Samsung Galaxy SMr*** was advised that a replacement phone is determined by technical specifications similar to those of the original product per section VIII of the Policy, not the retail priceA new replacement Motorola Moto X phone was delivered on June 12,
Furthermore, the Complainant contends that during the course of the claim, she was advised that a deductible of $or $would be applied instead of the $deductible which was actually appliedPer section VII of the Policy, $is the correct deductible amount for the original product
Upon review of the calls and notes related to this claim, it was determined that no misinformation was provided regarding the deductible and a promise of a loaner phone was never given
I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved
Regards,
*** ***
I am pleased in that AIG along with *** has issued be a buyout at 75% of the purchase price of the refrigerator which I have acceptedMy complaint has been resolved to my satisfaction
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
* ***)As a matter of background Ms*** contacted Service Net to report an issue with her Notebook adapter on July 31, ***The unit was assigned to a service provider, repaired, and returned to Ms*** October 16, ***Shortly thereafter, Ms*** reported another issue with the unit, which was repaired (logic board was replace) on November 20, ***On December 13, ***, Ms*** contacted Service Net and stated that the repair was not successful; specifically, the Windows updates on her unit were not workingService Net referred Ms*** to the manufacturer because the reported Windows update problem related to the computer software, and not covered under the service contractOn June 12, *** Ms*** contacted Service Net and stated that the manufacturer could not resolve the issue, and she was also having issues with the speaker/headphones on the unitThe unit was repaired (transfer cable was replaced) on July 10, ***On September 12, *** Ms*** contacted Service Net again and reported issues with the computer shutting downBased on the original cost of the unit and the total cost of prior repairs, there was not sufficient funds under the contract to continue service of the unitTherefore, Service Net offered the remaining balance of $under the service contract to Ms*** as an alternate solutionMs*** accepted the buyout on September 19, *** and subsequently filed a complaint with KY Revdex.comIn response to the complaint, Service Net assigned a service provider to address the software issueThe service provider received the unit for repairs from Ms*** ???on October 16, *** and parts ordered for the repairs/software were received on October 29, However, the software was not compatible with the original software on Ms***’s unit, so it was re-orderedOn October 30, *** we advised the KY Revdex.com that Service Net was working with Ms*** and the service provider to address the issueThe final repair of the unit was completed on November 26, ***.Please note that Ms*** has a work of warranty period of days from the date of the repairs, where an alternate solution can be provided if the repair is unsuccessfulOnce the work of warranty period expires, no further resolution will be offered to Ms*** as the service contract will be considered fulfilledWe hope we have responded to your inquiryPlease contact me if you have any questions regarding this fileThank youSincerely,
Please accept this response to your e-mail dated November 26, *** regarding the consumer complaint filed by Ms
*** with the Revdex.com, Inc (“KY Revdex.com”)The complaint was filed in relation to the repair of a Netbook/Notebook submitted under a Service Contract administered by Service Net Solutions, LLC(“Service Net”) on behalf of
*** ** ***%
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *** and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
This response is a description of the timeline of eventsI have already stated this as well as provided documentationMy issues is that this computer is a lemonThe computer has not been fixedThis company is clumping all the problems and non-fixed events into one to avoid the Lemon Law
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam: Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding his Service Contract (“the Plan”) purchased through ***.comThe Complainant contends that his computer is still
experiencing issues despite multiple repair attemptsAdditionally, the Complainant contends that there has been a delay in initiating the most recent repair request. Our records reflect that on August 26, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for his laptop computer in connection with audio loss and mouse track pad failureAfter the Complainant completed triage support for the computer on October 6, 2015, it was determined the unit needed to be shipped in for repairThe claim was subsequently referred to ** Services for repairOn October 29, 2015, ** Services received the unit and completed the repair on the same dayThe unit’s hard drive was replaced and the Complainant was advised to complete a full system restore with the recovery discs** Services also noted internally that the unit was received with missing screws but this was not interfering with functionalityThe computer was then returned to the Complainant On November 11, 2015, a rework order was initiated and assigned to ** Services to repair the missing back plate screwsA claim is considered a rework order if the service provider is required to repair the unit within days of the last service repair date regarding the same issueOn December 4, 2015, ** Services received the unit to complete the repairHowever, ** Services noticed that the Complainant had not yet completed the full system restore as advised after the original repair** Services returned the unit on the same day and again advised the Complainant to complete the full system restore with recovery software or the unit would not function properly.On December 28, 2015, ** Services received a second rework order as the Complainant indicated the unit was not functioning properly due to a faulty ribbon cableAfter performing a diagnostic test, ** Services determined that the issues causing the unit’s improper functionality were missing drivers and the fact a system restore had still not been completed** Services replaced the hard drive as a precaution and advised the Complainant once more to perform a full system restore with the recovery software. On January 16, 2016, the Complainant reported an issue with the unit’s flex cable/tape and indicated that the computer was not repaired correctlyOn February 4, 2016, ** Services advised SNW that the Complainant was opening the case of the computer which voids the Plan** Services subsequently received the third rework order for the unit on February 26, Between March 1, 2016, and March 15, 2016, ** Services has made four attempts to reach the Complainant by phone to begin the service repair and a voicemail message was left in each instance** Services has not received any response to date from the Complainant.Upon receipt of the complaint, SNW reviewed whether the computer qualified as a lemon under the PlanHowever, it has been determined that the computer cannot be considered for the NO LEMON GUARANTEE since, according to Section of the Plan, a product must undergo three separate service repairs for the same part each time, with three separate claim numbers, which requires a service repair or part replacement under a fourth claim number In this case, as noted above, there has only been one claim for the computer with three rework orders, which do not count as separate claimsSNW recommends that the Complainant speak with ** Services regarding any outstanding issues and, if necessary, submit the unit for further repair. I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number. Sincerely,*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC ("SNW") has completed a review of the above-captioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her Repair Coverage Service Plan ("the Plan")The Complainant contends that a refund should be provided for her defective
computer
Our records reflect that on April 28, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for her computer and indicated that the video card would go out and the unit displayed a blue screen upon restartThe Complainant advised that this issue has happened before and believes the unit is a lemonSNW advised that because this was the first claim initiated under the Plan, the unit would not qualify as a lemonThe claim was referred to ** *** for serviceThe repair was completed on May 5, 2015, and the unit was shipped back to the Complainant
On May 8, 2015, the Complainant contacted SNW and stated the computer was still experiencing issues** *** was contacted and accepted the rework** *** subsequently performed diagnostic testing and found no issuesThe unit was returned to the customer on May 18,
Between May 20, 2015, and July 13, 2015, the Complainant contacted SNW each time she received the computer back from ** *** (three separate occasions), indicating that the issues still remainedIn each instance, the unit was sent back to ** *** for further testingA new claim was not initiated because each repair was within the servicer’s rework period
During the most recent repair, ** *** could not duplicate the issues stated by the Complainant** *** advised that the Complainant should not reload *** a game sharing software, and then complete a full system restore using the OEM recovery software that came with the computer** *** indicated that the *** software commonly overloads computers and causes systems to display a blue screen error and/or shut down, which are the symptoms the Complainant stated were occurringSNW relayed this information to the Complainant and advised that the unit would not qualify for an alternate solution at this time since software issues are not covered, per Section 11.D of the PlanAdditionally, the computer cannot be considered for the No Lemon Guarantee since, according to Section of the Plan, a product must undergo three separate service repairs for the same part, with three separate claim numbers, which requires a repair under a fourth claim numberIn this case, as noted above, only one claim is on record because each repair remained within ** ***’ rework period
Should the issues continue after the *** software is not reloaded to the computer and the full system restore completed, the unit can be sent back to ** *** for diagnostic testing and repair of any mechanical issues
I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number
Sincerely,
*** ***
Service Net Warranty, LLC (“SNW”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the Revdex.com regarding her Extended Warranty Contract (“the Plan”)The Complainant contends that her refrigerator is still in need of repair and qualifies
for a new unit, or reimbursement under the PlanOur records reflect that on September 18, 2015, the Complainant initiated a claim for her refrigerator, indicating that the unit was not coolingThe claim was referred to Video Tech Center and on September 25, 2015, as reported by the Complainant, an onsite servicer diagnosed the issue as a fan issue, and that the servicer would return on September 29, On September 26, 2015, a Food Loss Coverage form was sent to the customerOn September 28, 2015, as reported by the Complainant, the servicer rescheduled the September 29, service appointment to October 2, Subsequently, the Complainant contacted SNW to request a new servicerAt this time, it was explained to the Complainant that cancelling and rescheduling a new servicer would delay the processThe Complainant was advised that she could locate her own service provider, pay out of pocket, and then submit to SNW for reimbursement of covered expenses up to the Plans claim limitThe Complainant instructed SNW that she would wait for the October 2, 2015, appointmentOn October 2, 2015, the servicer removed the ice buiand steamed out the fan, resulting in a fully functional unitOn October 16, 2015, the Complainant advised SNW that her unit was not cooling and that the door opened on its ownA rework request was forwarded to Video Tech Center and the servicer attended to the unit on October 23, An authorization request for the door gasket and the controller was received and approved by SNW on October 28, On November 18, the servicer attended an onsite repair of the unitThe Complainant contacted SNW on November 18, 2015, and indicated that the servicer advised that the door would need to be completely replaced and that the freezer was no longer workingSNW received an authorization request for the door on November 23, On November 24, 2015, Video Tech Center contacted SNW reporting that the door is on extended backorder until January 5, 2016. On November 30, 2015, the Complainant was offered, and accepted, a buyout from SNW in the amount of $Payment will be issued, via check, to the Complainant in the amount of $Additionally, the Complainant may be reimbursed up to $for food loss upon receipt of the completed Food Loss Coverage formThe Plan states: Food Loss: You will be reimbursed for food losses resulting from the operational or mechanical failure of Your refrigerator or freezer up to $per appliance over the life of the service ContractThis amount will be applied towards the maximum liability of this Contract I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file numberSincerely,See attachments for original response
Revdex.com:
Once we actually receive the final payment of $85, I will notify Revdex.com that I am satisfied and this claim can be closed Until then, please keep it open In reference to complaint ID ***, once the business performs this action and, if it does,then it's over
Regards,
*** ***
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I have confirmed that the refund amounts have been sent to the credit cards used for payment, and I consider this complaint resolved, with reservation.In the warranty company's response, it was noted that the warranty company never received notice that *** would not complete the repair for the warranty companyThis is falseAfter I contacted *** to verify the service appointment date and time (since there was a "glitch" the last time the warranty company was supposed to set up a service call), *** informed me that they were refusing to perform the work for the warranty companyI personally called the warranty company immediately afterward and informed the warranty company that *** would not perform the serviceThe warranty company told me that I was required to give them days in which they could search the internet for a company in my area willing to perform the service, and if no such company could be located, the warranty company could refund the warranty feeI was specifically told by a representative of the warranty company to give them daysTHIS is why no further contact was made until December The warranty company claims to have no record of my additional contact, but I can't keep notes for them - their representatives failed to properly update the account notes and failed to follow up with fulfilling their role in securing warranty serviceIn addition, when I requested the refund from supervisor *** ***, he promised to personally follow up with me within business days regarding the refundHe failed to fulfill this promise. While I am glad to have a refund of the amount I paid for the warranty, I still feel that the warranty company breached the contract and legitimately attempted consumer fraudIn my opinion, this does not warrant an A rating from the Revdex.com.
Regards,
*** ***
Dear Sir or Madam:AIG WarrantyGuard, Inc(“AIGWG”) has completed a review of the abovecaptioned complaint which was filed by the Complainant with the RevDex.com regarding three *** Service Contracts (“the Plan[s]”)The Complainant contends that there has been a
delay in cancelling the Plans and issuing refunds.Our records reflect that on March 30, 2016, the Complainant purchased three Plans for three separate home appliances: a refrigerator (Plan ***), dishwasher (Plan ***), and range (Plan ***)The Plans were purchased with an agreement from the Complainant to make four separate, monthly payments of $On March 30, 2016, and April 30, 2016, the first and second payments were collected for the Plans.On May 4, 2016, the Complainant contacted AIGWG to request the cancellation of the three Plans, indicating that he was not looking for individual service contracts for each appliance, but instead was under the impression he had purchased a full scope home warrantyAIGWG began to process the Complainant’s cancellation requests on this date. However, the Complainant had initiated a claim for repair on Plan *** on May 3, 2016, for his dishwasher indicating the unit was not cleaning on the onehour cycle and the clean light was no longer lighting upThe claim was assigned to service provider *** Factory Service (***) and a service appointment was scheduled for May 17, On May 13, 2016, AIGWG received the service order back from *** stating the Complainant cancelled the service repair on the unit.On May 13, 2016, AIGWG contacted the Complainant to follon the service repair cancellationDuring this call, the Complainant stated that he had cancelled all three Plans on May 4, Since Plan *** had a pending claim for service initiated by the Complainant on May 3, 2016, this Plan was not cancelled on May 4, After speaking with the Complainant on May 13, 2016, AIGWG escalated cancellation on Plan *** along with the refunds requested for the payment amounts that were collected for the Plans on March 30, 2016, and April 30, 2016.On May 27, 2016, AIGWG confirmed that all Plan cancellations and subsequent refunds for the Complainant were processed and issued back to the Complainant’s credit card on recordThe Complainant can expect to see two individual credits each in the amount of $on his credit card statement once the funds are posted to his account.I trust that I have satisfactorily responded to your inquiryShould you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly and reference our file number.Sincerely,*** ***