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:
While the business claims to have mailed a refund check for the original contract purchase amount (which I have yet to receive), they falsified information in regards to my contract acceptance date to try and avoid refunding the amount I purchased the contract for and made the process even more frustrating to try and get my money back.  The company's contract stated that the issues with my vehicle would be covered under their warranty however they decided not to honor their contract and pay for the repairs leaving me with over a $3000 bill.  They decided to wash their hands of this situation and reject the claim when they had an uneducated inspector falsify information and state that the damages were done prior to the contract acceptance date.  3 mechanics have now looked at my vehicle and all agree that there is NO way in which anyone could tell if the #5 wave plate was damaged prior to contract acceptance date therefore causing further damage when I have only driven the vehicle approximately 200 miles since the date of purchasing the vehicle.  I want others to know that this warranty company is evidentally not a valid warranty company and that they will not repair your vehicle so the vehicle owner is better off saving their money in case repairs are needed at a later date or they should find another warranty company from the start as this company will not uphold their end of the contract.  The company has made this process extremely stressful and frustrating and I was without my vehicle for 17 days while waiting on them to decide to not cover my repairs.  I have 2 small children and this is NOT acceptable.  They should have covered the repairs.  PERIOD.  With the other 113 complaints made against this company in the past 3 years, it is evident that we are all having the same issues with the company not taking care of their customers.
Regards,
[redacted]

Dear Ms. [redacted], I have received the above captioned complaint and have reviewed the filed. On June 10, 2015, [redacted] called...

in a claim for the oil pan gasket, axle seals, transmission pump seal were all leaking fluid and the O2 sensor of Mr. [redacted] 2007 [redacted]. These parts are non covered components 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 oil pan gasket, axle seals, 02 sensor and transmission pump seal are not listed; therefore, are non-covered components under the contract agreement. Also gasket and seals are not covered for fluid leaks. The contract states under section III. WHAT THIS SERVICE CONTRACT DOES NOT COVER paragraph #6, FOR FLUID LEAKS OR DAMAGE THAT RESULTS FROM FLUID LEAKS and paragraph “13. SEALS AND GASKETS ARE NOT COVERED BY THIS SERVICE CONTRACT UNLESS REQUIRED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COVERED REPAIR.” Sincerely, THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION Gale T. M[redacted] Corporate Attorney

[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: I was told that I could get a refund. Please check with the supervisor in your claims department.  It was clearly stated to me, and I would not be engaged in this drawn out and, frankly, frustrating exchange with your business had I not been told that I could get a refund and that my belt would be covered if it was "damaged beyond manufacturer's specifications."I would also ask that the business respond to the photos that I submitted that show almost identical damage to two belts, one which Penn Warranty is (errantly) claiming was due to an oil leak, the other, which is a belt that was due to wear and tear -- and the suggestion made by Penn Warranty's enlisted investigator to my mechanics that the belt should be covered.  How can a belt exhibit diffuse and consistent damage if it was caused by an oil leak. It does not make sense to anyone to whom I've shown the photos.PS - Whatever paltry amount Penn Warranty offered to pay for the repairs to my vehicle months ago has not been paid. I'm not talking about the second paltry offer of $60-something. I"m speaking of whatever was due to me months ago.
Regards,
[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 response is of no help or value to me or anyone and fails to demonstrate or even hint at ethical business practice.  Please be advised of my most recent correspondence with cars.com on which [redacted] and Penn advertise their goods and services:
Hello Dan and thank you for your attention.
I would like to provide you with a little more detail about my experience
and I do have a question...once a review is posted can it be revised or
removed?  [redacted] and Penn do have the opportunity to earn good feedback so I
would not want to post something negative if it can not be changed or
retracted.
Here is a summary of what happened and I will be as brief as possible...on
January 3, 2015 I purchased a black 2004 [redacted] V8 from [redacted]
for just under $5,800 tax included.  Also included was a 90 day policy from Penn
Warranty if purchased by December 31; however, I was allowed to have the
coverage since I gave a deposit before the deadline.
The car was obviously in need of some repairs and upon being examined by my
own personal mechanic it was revealed that immediate critical repairs would be
approximately $1,300...front control arms, links, ball joints, brakes, etc.  My
mechanic also informed me (in the presence of an [redacted] employee) that the
check engine computer had been cleared.  Once we were out of anyone's witness
the [redacted] employee became very defensive and told me that my mechanic was out
of line for making the check engine remark.
By the end of January 2015 the thermostat failed causing an overheat with
roadside breakdown situation and, yes, the check engine light came on giving
codes for various emissions issues and engine disabled theft deterrent since the
vehicle was sold without the [redacted] computer chip key.  The dealer key was
approximately $220 and the initial emissions repairs were approximately
$350.
Similar experiences continued throughout the year taking total repair costs
beyond what was paid for the car and time without the car (either being repaired
or not functioning properly) to a total of over 90 days...more than one quarter
of this year I have been without a car.  Also in 2015 I started new work in the
TV and film industry in Atlanta and started driving for Lyft so time without the
car costs me work opportunity and money in addition to the expensive
repairs.
I must also inform you that I was not the first consumer to purchase the
vehicle I now own from [redacted]...I was the second or possibly third.  According
to the Carfax Report provided by [redacted] the two prior buyers each had the car
for just under one year per buyer and repossession costs were disclosed on a
separate report provided to me at purchase.
Both [redacted] and Penn have been contacted multiple ways and neither have
taken any responsible action at all.  Penn continues to use a bevy of exclusions
to deny any and all of my claims after being contacted directly and more
recently through the Revdex.com.  I will continue to escalate as necessary and this
contact is only intended to inform cars.com of my experience with one of it's
advertisers.
Thanks again and best wishes for 2016!
[redacted]
 
 
 
Regards,
David Sanders

I have received the above referenced complaint. Upon review of our file Ms. [redacted] purchased our month to month [redacted] contract for her 2002 [redacted] that went into...

effect on March 14, 2014. The [redacted] Contract clearly states: “Provided payment is received by the specified date, this contract will renew monthly to the original purchaser unless cancelled in writing by the vehicle owner or The Penn Warranty Corporation.” This [redacted] Contract was received and approved by The Penn Warranty Corporation with payment being charged to account supplied on contract. Monthly payments were made from this account until March 29, 2016 when payment charged had been rejected. A notification was then forwarded to Ms. [redacted]. She then contacted us to reinstate the contract but it was rejected due to the current mileage on her vehicle. Also, since the [redacted] Contract is a month to month contract that renews each month payment is received, there will be no refund granted since the vehicle was covered for the months we did receive the payments. Thank you for your time and attention and if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION Gale T. M[redacted] Corporate Attorney

[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: I have never seen the attached contract before, as you can see  My signture is not on here anywere because I NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE. I have attached the bouchar I receved from [redacted] Autopark. My saleman name was [redacted]. As you can see the price was $1,000 not $450.00 and it also show it a unlimited mileage protection. sound like there is a problem with who your letting sell you warranty. I will not be dropping this, because this just plan wrong, You'll are taking customer money and not wanted to live up to your contract. Regards,[redacted]

August 22, 2014
Dear [redacted]:I have received the above referenced complaint date. From review of our file a claim was called in on August 20, 2014 by Boston Volvo Village for the anti skid light on of [redacted]’s 2006 [redacted]. Upon discussions with the shop the necessary repair...

was that of the active on demand cupler (AOC). This part is not covered under the contract agreement and the claim was then closed. The cupler bolts on the outside of the differential and the contract only covers the differential case and all internal parts The contract covers specific component 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.” It further states, “Only components listed in the above systems are covered by this Service Contract. No other components, other than those listed above under the “What This Service Contract Covers”, are covered by this Service Contract.” The active on demand cupler (AOC) is not listed; therefore, is a non-covered component under the contract agreement.Sincerely, THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATIONGale *. MCorporate Attorney

[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:At this time, we have taken it upon ourselves to have the truck fixed out of our pocket(who can be without a truck they use for work for over a month?) and am willing to accept your offer of $1,116.88 made payable to [redacted] to recoup SOME of the costs incurred that should have been covered by the warranty.  If this amount is not received, we will reject this offer and continue with our complaint.  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]

September 22, 2014
Dear [redacted]:
In response to [redacted]’s rejection to our response, our position remains the same as stated earlier. The contract specifically allows for a refund in the first 30 days of purchase and has no general provisions for a pro rated refund only those allowed by a particular state law. As to the requested transfer of the contract, the agreement pertaining to transferring states under V. GENERAL PROVISIONS, “#6. How This Service Contract May Be Transferred - This used vehicle service contract is transferable to subsequent owners. The charge to transfer is one hundred dollars ($100.00). The transferred service contract will remain in effect for the remainder of the original coverage period. Without a transfer to the new owner, this contract is terminated at the time of sale or when the contract holder no longer owns the vehicle.
The contracted vehicle was sold and since no transfer occurred at the time of sale of the vehicle the contract is now terminated.Sincerely,THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION
                                     Gale *. M[redacted]
Corporate Attorney

November 7, 2014Dear [redacted]:
I have received the above referenced complaint date. Upon review on March 26, 2014, we received and approved a 48month/Unlimited mileage Standard Contract on [redacted]’s 2005 [redacted]. On July 21, 2014 a claim was called in pertaining to the...

a/c compressor. The contract does not cover any items pertaining to the a/c and the claim was closed for non covered components. This is the only claim information we have on this vehicle.The terms and conditions of the Contract [redacted] agreed to have “fully understood” when executing purposes to the holder under the heading WHAT IS COVERED?, 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.” Clearly the contract has a limit of coverage as to particular items, which are detailed in the language.
As to the refund request, the terms of the Contract, states:“...there is no credit for early terminations.” Thank you for your time and attention and upon review if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me.Sincerely,
THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION
Gale M.
Corporate Attorney

RUN! DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THIS COMPANY!!! On May 17, 2016, I was driving home from work and heard a horrible noise and the van started vibrating very badly. I thought I had had a blowout, but when I stopped, and got out of the van, I could still hear the noise. I opened the hood, but not being a mechanic, I didn’t know what I was looking for and didn’t notice anything, but I shut the van off anyway and called AAA. I had the car towed. The service department call Penn Warranty Corp to file a claim. Was told to leave the van alone until someone from Penn could look at it and okay the claim. No one showed up and so the service department called again. They were told this time that the van had to be taken apart for the adjustor to look at. They call Penn when they were ready for the adjustor and still had to wait another week. The adjustor finally showed up on June 1. He looked at all the parts and said they wouldn't cover the repairs because the spark plug had been cross threaded. 2GM certified mechanics said that wasn't true. You could look at the head and see it wasn't crossed threaded. I have fought and fought with them over this and finally went to the Attorney General for help. Penn finally agreed to pay for the repairs but then said they wouldn't stand behind the repairs because they took the cheapest way out and knew I would have trouble again. I finally just asked for my money back and to cancel my account. They gladly gave it back to get rid of me. I am paying for the repairs myself which is about $3000.It is August 14, 2016 and my car is STILL in the shop. This has been a HORRIBLE experience. Penn Warranty Corp. is not a company you want to get involved with.

Extended warranty I purchased from dealer for my GL repair bill was a joke. I had a bill of $1500 and they would only pay $164 of it, needless to say I was ticked off. Wish I could get my money back for this warranty because it's no good to me if they only take care of that small amount of repair bill. I would not recommend this company to anyone.

June 24, 2015Dear [redacted]:I have received the complaint captioned above and have reviewed the file. On June 8, 2015, [redacted] called in a claim on [redacted]'s 2005 [redacted] for slipping in 2nd gear. An adjuster was assigned to this matter at which time verified with the shop customer/vehicle information, claims procedures, and tear down requirements. An estimate to rebuild the transmission was received and upon review, an inspection was requested and said inspection by an independent third party inspector took place.As a result of this inspection noted that the cause of failure was a material failure of the torque converter with metal contamination that resulted in the loss of pressure and heat damage to the second and third clutches from continuer operation. As a result of the above inspection findings we then authorized for the torque converter only as follows:$618.38 Shop's torque converter $915.00 Labor as per the [redacted] Labor Guide of 12.2hours @Contract rate of $75.00/hour - 100.00 per occurrence fee $1,433.38 Total (auth. # [redacted])Due to the continued operation verified by the independent inspector, the additional damages to the transmission were denied. The terms of the Gold Contract regarding reimbursement for a component failure states: “Other items not covered include: ....overheat...continued operation after the initial failure...” The failures to the engine were denied for said condition and only that of the left cam chain guide was covered.Upon review we will offer the additional amount of $811.62 for a total of $2,245.00. This is what we would have authorized for a used transmission repair had the additional damage not been denied due to the continued operation. This would consist of a used transmission for $1,445.00 and labor of 12 hours to remove and replace, per the [redacted] labor guide, at the contract rate of $75/hour for a total labor of $900.00. These amounts minus the $100.00 per occurrence fee comes to the amount offered.We are not accepting liability as to the additional amount but making this offer is made to see if this can be amicably resolved. If acceptable please have [redacted] forward a paid invoice and once received the amount of $811.62 will be paid through my office and the authorized amount of $1,433.38 will be paid through the claims department.Sincerely,THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATIONGale M. Corporate Attorney

Dear Ms. [redacted],
Our position has been stated and I will not repeat it here again. We did offer a refund of the contract price of $1,399.00 and cancel the authorized bearings. That is our final offer.
Gale T. M[redacted]

Dear [redacted]
    In response to [redacted] complaint please see the attached correspondence.  Also attached tis the contract signed by [redacted] stating she has read and understand its...

terms.
                                        ...⇄ Gale T. M[redacted]
Business enclosed copy of the contract

Dear Ms. [redacted],
   In response to Mr. [redacted]'s complaint please see the attached...

correspondence.
                                      Gale T. M[redacted]
I have received the above captioned complaint and have reviewed the filed. On October 13, 2014, [redacted] called in a claim for the engine on Mr. [redacted]’s 2003 [redacted] 9-5. 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 found the #4 rod bearing has spun and there is scoring to the mating rod and crankshaft journal. The #1 main bearing is gouged and scored and so is the main crank journal. The cause of failure was sludge accumulation and poor oil circulation. Continued operation caused the #4 rod bearing to spin with additional damages to the crankshaft rod and other bearings. Base on these findings we then authorized $360.46 for a connecting rod bearing set and oil pan gasket only. Due to continued operation verified by the independent inspector, the additional damages to the engine were denied. The terms of the Gold Contract regarding reimbursement for a component failure states: “Other items not covered include…continued operation after the initial failure...” Again, failures to the engine were denied for said condition and only that of the rod bearings were covered per this agreement for it was verified to be defective or worn beyond service limits. This too is addressed in the terms of the Gold Contract thus stating, “THE PENN WARRANTY CORPORATION will reimburse you, or your repair center, the amount authorized for the repair or replacement of any component covered by this agreement that is found to be defective or worn beyond service limits....” Neither was the case in this matter. 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 Gale T. M[redacted] Corporate Attorney

[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:I have spoken to a mechanic other than the one that had 
Serviced my car and had asked him under what circumstances could a brake line fail. His response
Was it could burst from rust or corrosion,( most likely) manufactures defect ,not very likely,or vandalism 
None of which is covered under this policy. What I am gathering is that brake lines are not covered at all
Although the policy clearly states that they are. I have read many other complaints that are similar to mine
In which things that were supposedly covered were not covered , it seemed that there are loopholes in the
Contract that allows penn to never pay a claim. Basically this contract is not worth the paper it is printed 
On it appears to be a total scam.
Regards,
[redacted]

I am happy that I bought this warranty above any other. I met with the warranty rep for my dealership and she took the time to walk me through the process. I appreciate the fact that she was knowledgeable and walked me through the claims process, should I need to use my service contract.

Please see our response to complaint number
ID#[redacted]. This complaint, ID#[redacted], is a duplicate. Please correct your files.
Gale T. Mayorowski

September 18, 2015
Dear [redacted]:
I have received the above captioned complaint and have reviewed the filed. On May 18, 2015, [redacted]’s Auto Service called in a claim for the engine on [redacted]’s 2002 [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 #3 rod bearing spun on the connecting rod. The rod and crank journals are scored. The other bearings are worn and lightly scored. There is heavy metal debris contamination in the oil. The cause of failure was the #3 rod bearing failure causing it to spin with subsequent damage to the crankshaft, rod and other bearings from continued operation. Based on these findings we authorized $510.23 for the rod bearings only broken down as follows:$70.73 [redacted] rod bearing set/oil pan gasket
$539.50 labor (8.3 hours pursuant to the [redacted] Labor Guide@ Contract rate of $65.00/hour)
$50.00 Towing
- 100.00 per occurrence fee
$510.23 Total (auth. # [redacted])
The additional damage to the vehicle was a result of long term continued operation after the initial failure of the rings. 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.
As to any delays in this matter, the claim was called in on May 18, 2015 and the vehicle was not torn down for inspection until June 1, 2015. The vehicle was then inspected and the claim was authorized on June 4, 2015. Any delays on this claim were that of the shop in awaiting the teardown and not by our corporation.
I thank you for your time and if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Gale *. M[redacted] 
Corporate Attorney