The Penn Warranty Corporation

July 7, 2014
Dear [redacted]:I have received the above captioned complaint and have reviewed the file. On June 20, 2014, [redacted] called in a claim for the engine on [redacted]’s 2007 [redacted]. On that date, an adjuster was assigned to this matter who spoke with the...

repair facility verifying customer/vehicle information, claims procedures, tear down requirements. An estimate for a replacement of the engine was received and from review, an inspection by a third party independent inspector was requested to verify failures. The inspector verified the #1 connecting rod locked up on the crank journal and broke apart and knocked a 4 inch hole through the block. The #1 crank journal is heavily scored also has a large chunk rubbed off the journal too. The cause of failure was the initial failure of the #1 rod bearing with continued operation until the rod broke off the crankshaft and impacted through the block. Based on these findings we authorized $272.44 for the rod bearings only broken down as follows:$106.44    Rock Auto rod bearing set/oil pan gasket$216.00    Labor (3.6 hours pursuant to the Mitchell Labor Guide@ Contract rate of $60.00/hour) $50.00 Towing - 100.00 per occurrence fee $272.44 Total (auth. # [redacted])The additional damage to the vehicle was a result of continued operation after the initial failure of the bearing. The contract specifically states under section III WHAT THIS SERVICE CONTRACT DOES NOT COVER, under number 15 of said section, “FOR ADDITIONAL LOSS OR DAMAGE WITH IS OCCASIONED BY YOU OR OPERATOR‘S FAILURE TO USE ALL REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT THE VEHICLE FROM ANY FURTHER LOSS OR DAMAGE AFTER A BREAKDOWN OR FAILURE HAS OCCURRED OR BEEN INDICATED.” Again, failures to the other items were denied for said conditions.For the replacement of a covered component to be authorized the terms of this service contract you agreed to have "fully understood" when executing must be met. As listed on service contract, to remedy any breakdown of the parts listed as covered, "the failures of any original or like replacement part covered by this Service Contract to perform its intended function(s) in normal service, including worn beyond service limits...” Failures as such did not occur. As verified by the independent third party inspector, the additional failures occurred due to continued operation thus not from normal service or worn and therefore, were properly denied coverage. Further, we did receive an invoice from the shop and did pay them the authorized amount.I thank you for your time and if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
In response to the statements made by Penn Warranty, the respondent states several points regarding the contract that was signed by me and accepted by their company.  Attached is a copy of the signed warranty front and back.  This was the only piece of paperwork signed and dated upon purchase of the vehicle relative to the warranty.  Penn Warranty claims the signed contract states that, "In order to proceed with the claim tear down to the point of failure must be permitted and is the responsibility of the contract holder per the service contract."  Additionally, Penn Warranty states, "As per the contract terms, the contract holder is responsible for the tear down and diagnosis."  Please review the attached copy of the contract.  No where on this signed contract are the above terms stated and agreed upon with signature verification.  Again, this is the only piece of paperwork provided to me, the consumer, by the dealership or the warranty corporation. 
Additionally, I have attached a copy of two items provided by the manufacturer dealership.  It should be understood I am in no way rejecting a tear down, however, the mechanic at the dealership assured me IN WRITING (see attached) as evidence on the paperwork provided that a tear down would not produce the visual evidence the warranty is asking for, specifically, "tear down and valve body will for inspection of components will not produce visual defect."  He stated that the part has become "lazy" and is therefor malfunctioning.  He has provided me with an estimate to fix the problem which has been identified by them as the valve body.  The dealer guarantees that is the problem and replacement of the valve body will resolve the issue.  Please note the contract provided clearly states the valve body is a covered part.
The warranty company also states "There were no verifiable failures shown to the vehicle."  The vehicle does not shift properly and is unsafe to drive.  I have, on several occasions, offered to bring the car to the warranty company for them to test drive themselves, all of which they have expressed no interest in.  The warranty company states in it's response, "It is standard throughout the automotive industry."  I am not within the automotive industry and none of which the warranty company's response is written in the signed contract provided.  I am a consumer with a broken vehicle and as per the contract, the defective part is covered under the warranty I paid for in full and was accepted by Penn Warranty Corp.  All I am asking is that the vehicle be restored to it's proper safe working order.
Lastly, several attemtps were made by myself and the above mentioned mechanic to contact the adjustor, [redacted]'s supervisor, [redacted] with no response to date.  Please note that my husband has been handeling coorespondence with warrany company and mechanic.  I have provided written permission to both the warranty company and the mechanic to do so.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted],
    The request for $102.89 for the axle shaft repair has been authorized by the claims department.  Please have the invoice sent to my attention and I will have it processed for payment.
                                    Gale M.

Dear [redacted],
For the reasons I stated earlier our position remains the same.
Gale *. M[redacted]

April 27, 2015
  Dear Ms. Dondero,I have received the complaint by [redacted] pertaining to a service contract purchased by Pavel Akhtar requesting a refund. The contract agreement under V. General Provisions number 7., specifically states a 100 percent refund of the...

Service Contract will be made less any claims paid within 30 days of the Service Contract Purchase Date. The service contract was purchased on February 17, 2015, thus exceeding the allotted 30 days denying refund.Further under New York State Law “ISC Article 79 § 7903(e) Service contracts shall require every provider to permit the service contract holder to return the contract within at least twenty days of the date of mailing of the service contract or within at least 10 days if the service contract is delivered at time of sale.” Our contract states 30 days which is greater than NY law, since this time period has passed, no refund will be granted. There are no general provisions in the contract agreement granting any pro rated refunds, therefore none will be granted. Also if any refund that was to be granted would go to the lien holder [redacted] Dealer Services as stated in the contract agreement.
Upon review if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATIONGale M.
Corporate Attorney

Dear [redacted],
     In response to [redacted]'s complaint we did forward a refund check in the amountof $845.00 to the lien holder [redacted] on June 4, 2015.  We have checked with our bank and the check has not been cashed.  We then put a stop...

payment on this check and a second one is being issued.  The amount refunded is the amount we received for the service contract and we did notify the selling dealer [redacted]s to refund any amount they may have charged for the contract and retianed.
                                        ...⇄ Gale ** M[redacted]

[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 [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  Regards, [redacted]

Dear [redacted]
   In response to [redacted] complaint, please see the attached...

correspondence.
                                 [redacted]
I have received the above referenced complaint. Upon review, on May 27, 2015, J&J Automotive initiated a claim for [redacted] Upon investigation the necessary repairs were that of the window motor, steering wheel position sensor and fuel filler pipe. These are non covered components and the claim was then closed The terms and conditions of the Basic Contract under the heading WHAT IS COVERED?, states the components and systems that receive coverage. It further mentions, “Only the components listed in the above systems are covered. No other components, other than those listed above under “What Is Covered/“, are covered by this agreement.” The items called in on the claim are not listed in the agreement and therefore there is no coverage for those particular items.Sincerely, THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION

Dear **. [redacted],
In response to **. [redacted]'s rejection our position remains the same. The damage occurred due to overheating as stated by the inspector. Also as to the bulletin, the inspector reviewed it which also states that this condition results from overheating that weakens the threads. This is stated in the letter dated 2/24/14 that was earlier attached. This further verifies that the vehicle was overheated. Also please note that there is a $2,500 claim limit in the contract so the "high costs of repairs" was not and never is an issue in covering claims. [redacted]

I have received the above referenced complaint. Upon review of our file [redacted] 
[redacted] pertaining to a 2006 [redacted] in which [redacted] is the contract holder called in a claim on December 10, 2015. The shop...

stated the vehicle wouldn’t shift out of first gear. We instructed them to obtain the owners permission to have it torn down and diagnosed to show the complete and necessary repair. Upon investigation the necessary repair was that of the electronic shift module. This part is a non covered component under the service contract agreement and the claim was then closed. The contract covers specific components listed as stated under Section I: “ WHAT THIS SERVICE CONTRACT COVERS Coverage - During the Service Contract Period We will pay a Repair Facility, or at Our option, reimburse You the Cost to remedy any Breakdown of the parts listed below, less Per Occurrence. Parts not listed are not covered by this Service Contract.” The contract also states on Page 1: “Only the components listed in the above systems are covered by this Service Contract. No other components, other than those listed above under “What This Service Contract Covers”, are covered by this Service Contract.” The electronic shift module is not listed; therefore, a non-covered component under the contract agreement. This item is not internal to the transmission, an external transmission sensor nor the transmission control module. The electronic shift module is located in the actual shifter assembly and is not part of the transmission. As to the request for a refund, the contract under V. General Provisions number 7. specifically states a 100 percent refund of the Service Contract will be made less any claims paid within 30 days of the Service Contract Purchase Date. The service contract was purchased on April 11, 2014, thus exceeding the allotted 30 days denying refund. Further, New York State Law “ISC Article 79 § 7903(e) Service contracts shall require every provider to permit the service contract holder to return the contract within at least twenty days of the date of mailing of the service contract or within at least 10 days if the service contract is delivered at time of sale.” Our contract states 30 days which is greater than NY law, since this time period has passed, no refund will be granted. There are no general provisions in the contract agreement granting any pro rated refunds, therefore none will be granted. Sincerely, THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION Gale T. M[redacted] Corporate Attorney

Dear **. [redacted],
In response to **. [redacted]'s rejection we did offer to pay for the timing belt in my last reply. As to a refund she was never told she would receive one only that it will be reviewed since there are particular state laws granting refunds. The car was purchased in PA which has no such law and **. [redacted] resides in NY which has a refund within the first 20 days of purchase. Since that has passed the contract language prevails and there is not credit for early terminations. We are still offering the timing belt as previously stated.
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The coolant fan is part of the warranty it still should be coverered. I paid 2500 for this warranty. If the connector is not covered the fan is. Whats the reason for the coverage? Since I purchased this vehicle and warranty it has not been on fire or been in a flood. I had to pay 884.00 for these repairs whats the use of a warranty. I will get a copy of invoice and send to company.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted],
In response to [redacted]'s complaint I have attached a correspondence that I sent his attorney detailing our position. I asked for any documentation as to the tire sizes of the vehicle that [redacted] is referencing for review. I have not received anything from his attorney and...

ask that [redacted] please send whatever information he may have and it will be reviewed and responded to.
Gale *. M[redacted]

[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 [redacted], and find that this resolution, while I still do not accept the initial finding by the independent inspector that I had continue to operate the car after initial failure, is satisfactory to me.  I will fax my repair shop receipt to PWC and expect that they will send me a check in the amount of $811.62 upon receipt of the faxed invoice.
Regards,
[redacted]

February 22, 2016Dear [redacted]I have received the complaint captioned above and have reviewed the file. On February 15, 2016, [redacted] called in a claim for [redacted]'s 2008 [redacted] stating that the rack and pinion, needed replacement. On that date, the...

adjuster spoke to the repair center and went over the claims procedures and teardown requirements for the repair and authorized $780.05 for the rack broken down as follows:$410.05 Rock Auto rack and pinion $470.00 Labor (4.7 hours as pursuant to the [redacted]Labor Guide@ contract rate of $100.00/hour) -$100.00 Per occurrence fee $470.05 Total AuthorizationPlease note at the time of the authorization a break down of parts and labor were given to the service center and they in turn would inform the owner of the information for him to decide how to repair his vehicle. The owner of the vehicle has the final decision as to how to have it repaired and to choose different types of parts is certainly his prerogative. However, this decision does not alter the terms of the contract or the amount authorized for the repair and the amount authorized could be used as an allowance toward any repair the owner may choose. As per supplying parts, the adjuster merely locates a supplier with available parts and in turn relays the information to the repair center that is the party responsible for making arrangements for shipment and availability of said part.The terms of the Elite Contract regarding the repair of the vehicle states: “At the administrator’s option, replacement parts used in covered repairs may include new, remanufactured, used or non-original equipment manufactured parts. All parts will conform to manufacturer’s specifications.”The parts found by our corporation were non-original equipment manufactured parts, have a warranty from the supplier and are covered by us through out the duration of the contract agreement. The labor for the repair is 4.7 hours as per the [redacted] Labor Guide to remove and replace the wheel bearing, rear one side, in this vehicle. This guide is a universal labor guide for repairs to vehicles. The contract covers labor to repair or replace a covered component and that is what was authorized.The adjuster looks for the most cost-effective repair for the vehicle. Only the owner of the vehicle can make the decision as to how their vehicle can be repaired. By choosing parts at a greater cost you would then be responsible for the difference in costs charged by the repair center. Please note that we have the right to investigate and authorize the claim for coverage, we do not just pay the service center what they want for parts and labor. The authorization listed above repairs the vehicle as pursuant to the contract terms. Also, the vehicle was purchased used and for us to authorize new parts when remanufactured are available would give the owner of the vehicle a greater benefit than originally purchased.Thank you for your time and attention and if you have any questions of comments please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,Gale M[redacted]
Corporate Attorney

Dear [redacted],
In response the contract holder is [redacted] and the shop that is repairing her vehicle had filed this complaint. After two misdiagnosis by the shop the vehicle was inspected a second time and we then authorized $765.00 for the caliper repair and $640.30 for the air spring...

repair. We have abided by the contract terms and proper authorization has been made once it was determined exactly what have failed.
Gale *. M[redacted]

[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 [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  Requested paid invoices are attached. 
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear [redacted],
In response to [redacted]'s rejection our position remains the same as stated earlier. The vehicle was inspected by an independent inspector who verified that the vehicle was sold with the failures. However we will offer the amount of $1,354.00 for this repair. We are not accepting liability for this repair but making this offer to see if it can be amicably resolved. If acceptable please have [redacted] provide a paid invoice and payment will be sent to his attention.

Gale *. M[redacted]

Dear [redacted],
    There was no rejection attached to the response only the original complaint.
                                        ...⇄ Gale ** M[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The prices they used to quote the repair did not come from an actual body shop. When I asked where I could take my car to have the repairs done at this price they were unable to give me an answer. Also, upon 1st encountering the problem, I asked if [redacted] of South Orlando was an approved dealer. I was told they were. The repair time for fixing the Piston #2 was 28.5 hours, more than double the 13 as quoted. Since the quote did not come from an actual repair shop I am not sure how they arrived at 13 hours. Also, they parts they suggested using to repair the car were not [redacted] certified parts. With a car just barely over 50,000 miles I would expect to had dealership certified part. I was also with out a car for 37 days due to their inadequate response time. A rental car for 37 days equals well over $50. Had they responded to phone calls and voice mails in a more timely manner I still would have been with out a car for at least a week by the time the 3rd party investigated, parts were ordered and repairs were completed. At this point the only reason I have a car now is because I sold the car. I would like full refund of the purchase price of the warranty. $2,500.
Regards,
[redacted]