Endurance Warranty Services

Please be advised, as listed in the consumer’s complaint, Endurance is simply the selling agent for this contract. The administrator/obligor as listed in the consumer’s contract (attached) is United Car Care (UCC). This means that UCC approves or denies the claims and Endurance does not play a part in these decisions.

Per UCC’s claims notes, on 4/26/19, the consumer’s repair facility contacted the UCC Claims department and reported a failure to the high pressure fuel pump. The repair facility reported an error code of *** for a valve inside the fuel pump. The repair facility reported that the code had been set in 03/2019. As the high pressure fuel pump is not listed on the consumer’s stated component contract, UCC subsequently denied this claim.

On 5/8, the repair facility again contacted the UCC Claims department and reported that the failure was not to the fuel pump, but to the timing chain. UCC sent an inspector to verify this failure. Per UCC’s claim information, the chain was stretched to the point where “it was off the gears”. UCC determined that this stretching was long term and had occurred prior to the end of the consumer’s waiting period and subsequently denied the claim as pre-existing.

Again, Endurance is simply the selling agent for this contract and has no part in claims decisions. If the consumer wishes to seek arbitration against UCC in regards to this claim, this process in in the consumer’s contract, pg. 11, “Arbitration”.

In the interest of customer service, Endurance will offer a full refund to the consumer due to their dissatisfaction with the contract, pending the signature of a letter allowing Endurance to refund all payments. To receive this, the consumer may contact Endurance at .

Please be advised, the repair facility was not able to demonstrate any hard part failure or actual broken component. The inspector was shown fully intact and operation pulleys and a fully intact CVT belt still attached to the pulleys. The only noted failure was some slight play in the CVT belt due to wear, but no hard part failure. As wear and tear is not eligible under the consumer's contract (attached) per pg. 2, "Breakdown", the repair was subsequently declined.

Upon receipt of this complaint, Endurance's Customer Resolutions Manager reached out to the consumer and offered several resolution options. The consumer advised that he would evaluate the options and respond to Endurance's Customer Resolutions Manager with his decision.

Per the consumer's repair facility, and confirmed by the inspection photos, there was no hard part failure noted on the vehicle, but simply slight play in the chain due to wear. The chain was not broken or detached, and was attached completely to both intact and functional pulleys.

Per pg. 2 of the consumer's contract, attached in a previous response,

Breakdown refers to the Breakdown of a defective part or faulty workmanship as supplied by the Manufacturer or Dealer, but does not include gradual reduction in operating performance due to wear or tear or damage resulting from Breakdown of non-covered parts.

Upon initial receipt of this complaint, Endurance's Customer Resolutions Manager reached out to the consumer and offered as a courtesy to assist the consumer with financing this contractually denied claim, as well as waiving a monthly payment and providing the consumer access Endurance's Elite program at no cost. As an alternative, the Customer Resolutions Manager offered to expedite the consumer's pro-rata refund. The consumer stated that he would weigh the options and contact the Manager with his decision. At this time, Endurance has received no further direct contact from the consumer and has been unable to reach the consumer. Endurance is still willing to execute either of the options provided to the consumer.

As the consumer has involved legal counsel, Endurance believes that this complaint is beyond the purview of the Revdex.com. Please be advised, prior to filing this complaint with the Revdex.com, the consumer contacted the Illinois Department of Insurance. Endurance filed the following response with the DOI and the DOI found it to be satisfactory. As a regulatory body has already dismissed the consumer’s claims, Endurance further believes that this complaint is beyond the purview of the Revdex.com.

On January 8, 2018, the consumer contacted Endurance and purchased a Select Premier vehicle service contract (attached) for her 2013 *** GT with 138,002 miles at the time of purchase. The Select Premier has a 60 day and 1000 mile waiting period. Any failure that first occurs prior to the completion of both the time and mileage is considered pre-existing to the contract and is not eligible for coverage (Contract pg. 2, Terms & Conditions, "Pre-existing" definition.)

On May 14, 2018, a representative from *** Auto Repair contacted the Endurance claims department to file a claim for repairs. The repair facility reported that the vehicle was driven into their facility and the consumer reported a "horrible noise from the engine". The repair facility confirmed the loud knocking noise and suggested that the cause was a stretched timing chain. The repair facility believed that there was internal damage to the engine.

As part of the normal claims process, Endurance requested maintenance documentation and acquired a vehicle history report. The consumer provided several maintenance documents, including one handwritten oil change document. Per the consumer's contract, pg. 3, Contract Holder's Maintenance Requirements, hand written receipts will not be accepted.

Endurance noticed a repair visit on the vehicle history report that occurred on February 12, 2018, inside the contract's 60-day waiting period. As this document had not been included in the maintenance provided by the consumer, Endurance requested documentation from this visit. The consumer provided a document from the 2/12/18 visit to *** Motors, upon which was printed, "customer states loud knocking noise from engine", an identical complaint to the current claim. Beneath this was a hand-written note stating "had exhaust rattle, repaired hanger". There was no line on the invoice for an exhaust hanger or any labor, nor any part number for the hanger.

As some of the documents were non-verifiable and the complaint was present prior to the end of the waiting period, the repair was subsequently declined for a pre-existing failure and lack of verifiable maintenance.

Please be advised, at no time was authorization issued for this claim. Endurance did contact the repair facility during the claim to collect service quotes as a normal part of the claims process. Endurance collects service quotes during the claim in anticipation of a claims decision as a means to expedite the overall claims process. Any discussion between the Customer Service Manager and the consumer was in terms of finding methods for the consumer to decrease the out-of-pocket costs and the consumer was never advised that claim authorization had been provided. Again, at no time was the consumer’s claim authorized.

In the interest of customer service, Endurance has offered to the consumer a full refund of all payments made due to the consumer's experience. The consumer has declined this offer and the contract remains in effect per the consumer's decision.

Please be advised, at no time was authorization issued for this claim. Authorization was not issued to the repair facility, the consumer, or the consumer’s attorney. Endurance stated such in all previous responses and has never issued a denial for this claim with the reason of “no prior authorization”. Endurance understands the consumer’s confusion as “authorization was not issued” appears similar to the phrase “repairs without prior authorization”, found in the Exclusions section of the consumer’s contract. Endurance has never issued authorization for this claim or any agreement to make payment for these repairs, as payment is excluded based on the terms and conditions of the consumer’s contract. Endurance’s Customer Resolutions Manager has reviewed all call recordings between Endurance and the consumer, as well and between Endurance and the repair facility, and at no time was authorization provided.

It is the consumer’s contention in her previous response that “*** Motors told me THEY heard a noise when they replaced the recall part. I told them I would have my mechanic take a look. My mechanic found it to be an exhaust hanger, which he repaired. *** Motors agreed they never looked at the engine, they just were assuming ...and yes they could have been mistaken”. This demonstrates that the previous repair facility identified a concern and did not properly diagnose or perform the repair. This confirms that the complaint was pre-existing to the end of the contract waiting period or was an improper previous repair. Endurance recommends that the consumer visit any negligent acts with *** Motors.

As the consumer is unhappy with the outcome of the claim, Endurance will still honor its offer to provide a full refund to the consumer.

Please be advised, Endurance is the selling agent for this contract. The administrator/obligor is *** (***). This means that *** is responsible for the administration (approval or denial) of claims and Endurance is not involved in this decision.

The consumer's contract (attached) provides for *** to reimburse the cost of road hazard tire repair with prior authorization. On 5/8/19, the consumer contacted the Endurance Claims department (not the *** claims department) and discussed road hazard reimbursement. As Endurance, when acting as an administrator, does not offer this service, the claims agent advised the consumer that the department she called does not perform such reimbursement.

Once it had been determined that the consumer contacted the wrong Claims department, *** subsequently declined reimbursement of the tire repair as the consumer had not received prior authorization.

Endurance is sorry for the confusion experienced by the consumer as Endurance is the selling agent but not the administrator of this contract, and the consumer was provided information in regards to Endurance-administered contracts rather than *** contracts.

In the interest of customer service, Endurance is willing to reinstate the consumer's contract and reimburse the cost of the tire repair upon receipt of the paid invoice due to the confusion.

Endurance has attempted to contact the customer and has left multiple voicemails, but has not received a reply. If Endurance does not receive a reply, Endurance will instead provide the consumer's pro-rata refund, to be sent out on 6/11/19.

On 7/11/16, the consumer purchased a Select Premier coverage for her vehicle. The contract (attached) was sent out via USPS Critical Mail and the consumer was provide a 30-day review period during which she could receive a full refund if she did not accept the terms of the coverage.

On 4/1/19, a representative from *** Transmissions contacted the Endurance Claims department and reported a failure to the vehicle's transmission. As part of the normal claims process, Endurance sent an independent third-party inspector to confirm the failures reported by the repair facility.

On 4/5/19, Endurance received the inspection report and advised the repair facility that further diagnostic was necessary to pinpoint the specific cause of failure and extent of damages.

On 5/8/19, Endurance, having not received any further diagnostic, reached out to the repair facility to attempt to progress the claim. The repair facility reported that the cause of failure was a worn pulley seal. An inspector was sent to confirm this failure.

On 5/10/19, Endurance received the inspection report. The inspector confirmed the repair facility's findings of a worn pulley seal, as well as a worn drum seal and worn CVT belt. As the Select Premier contract does not provide for the coverage of wear and tear failures (pg. 2, "Breakdown") and seals and gaskets are not eligible as standalone failures, the claim was subsequently declined.

Endurance is sorry for the frustration caused by the non-listed component failure, as well as the delay in the claim due to the repair facility's failure to provide proper diagnostic.

Endurance has reached out to the consumer in an attempt to provide a mutually beneficial resolution and is awaiting the consumer's reply. The consumer may contact Endurance's Customer Service Supervisor at .

Endurance's Customer Service Supervisor was able to make contact with the consumer on 6/5/19, and in the interest of customer service, provided financial assistance to the consumer. The consumer indicated that the assistance was satisfactory.

Endurance values its relationship with each customer, and appreciates the consumer's willingness to allow Endurance to provide a beneficial resolution.

On 12/15/17, the consumer purchased a Select Premier contract (attached) for his vehicle. Prior to any transaction being completed, the consumer was advised of the scope and level of coverage, and the consumer opted to activate. A copy of the consumer's contract was sent via USPS Critical Mail for review, and the consumer was provided a 30-day period during which time he could receive a full refund.

On 5/7/19, a representative from *** Service Center contacted Endurance and reported a failure to the transmission. The repair facility reported an "internal malfunction of the speed sensor" in the valve body and reported multiple error codes for the speed sensor. As part of the normal claim process, an independent third-party inspector was sent out to confirm the failures. The inspector confirmed the shop's diagnosis of the failure of an internal speed sensor as the cause of failure. As the consumer's stated component contract does not list this component, it is ineligible as a cause of failure and the repair was declined.

Endurance has attempted to reach out to the consumer and resolve, and has left voicemails for the consumer. Endurance has received no reply. Per the consumer's request, the contract has been cancelled and the consumer's pro-rata refund has been expedited. The refund was sent out on 5/28/19.

Endurance apologizes for the consumer's below-standard experience. Endurance does not tolerate any unprofessional, rude, or discourteous conduct from its employees and has forwarded this complaint to the Quality Assurance team for internal review.

As a result of the consumer's complaint, our company placed the consumer on our internal "Do Not Mail" database to ensure that she does not receive any future direct mail advertisements from our company. Please allow up to 10 business days to process this request. The consumer may still receive additional mail pieces sent during the processing time.

While Endurance can confirm that a mailed advertisement was sent to this customer, Endurance has no record of any calls to or from the number listed in the complaint.

Please note, Endurance does not make "cold calls" or any outbound sales call unless specifically requested by a consumer via our online portal. There are many companies in the industry that do not abide by the VPA's Standards of Conduct and may be making unsolicited calls. Endurance understands the frustration that this can cause to the consumer and the confusion that may result when the consumer receives a mail piece from Endurance at the same time as these solicitation calls. Endurance can confirm that the solicitation calls did not originate from Endurance. Endurance recommends that the consumer determine from what company the calls originate and contact that company to ask that they cease.We are sorry for the frustration that Endurance's mail piece caused the consumer, and as a result of the consumer's complaint, our company placed the consumer on our internal "Do Not Mail" database to ensure that he does not receive any future direct mail advertisements from our company. Please allow up to 10 business days to process this request. The consumer may still receive additional mail pieces sent during the processing time.

On 2/21/18, the consumer contacted Endurance and purchased a Select Premier vehicle service contract for her 2012 *** 328i. A copy of the contract is attached. Upon activation, a copy of the consumer’s contract was sent via USPS Critical Mail for her review. The consumer was provided a 30 period whereby she could receive a full refund if she was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the contract.

On 7/16/18, a representative from *** Automotive contacted the Endurance Claims department and reported an electrical failure to the blower motor. As the blower motor is eligible for coverage and this met the definition of a breakdown, the claim was authorized and paid by Endurance.

On 1/29/19, a representative from *** Automotive contacted the Claims department and reported multiple warning lights on the dash and a stalling engine. The consumer then moved the vehicle to *** of West Houston, who continued the claim. An independent third-party inspector was sent out to verify the failures and maintenance documentation was requested from the consumer.

Per the owner’s manual for this vehicle, oil changes are due when the service light comes on, or a minimum of once per year. Endurance received no maintenance document for any oil change performed in 2018. Additionally, the vehicle’s computer set an error code (1c4002) for the engine oil level being too low at a mileage that was 700 miles less than the claim mileage, demonstrating that the vehicle was operated for 700 miles with low oil. As the consumer’s coverage excludes failures due to lack of maintenance and failures due to continued operation in a failed state, the claim was subsequently declined.

On 3/8/19, the consumer contacted Endurance and requested cancellation of her contract. Endurance cancelled the contract per the consumer’s request and issued the consumer’s pro-rata refund. The refund was sent out on 4/5/19 to the consumer’s address on file.

Please be advised, the consumer's repair facility was able to drain 4.5L of oil from the vehicle for the inspector. The inspector submitted photographs of the collection unit, demonstrating that it does in fact hold at least that amount. Additionally, the letter submitted by the consumer in her last response stated that the repair facility was apparently able to drain 5L from the engine, again explicitly demonstrating that hte vehicle will indeed hold at least 4.5L. Per the manufacturer's guidelines, the vehicle's oil capacity is 5.2L. The repair facility was only able to show 4.5L at the time of the inspection, demonstrating low oil volume.

Additionally, the vehicle's computer set an error code (1c4002) for the engine oil level being too low 700 miles prior to the claim. This is not the same as a "maintenance reminder" and is demonstrates that the vehicle was operated with low oil for 700 miles. As the consumer's coverage excludes failures due to lack of maintenance and failures due to continued operation in a failed state, the claim was subsequently declined.

Please be advised, Endurance cancelled the coverage at the consumer's request and issued the appropriate pro-rata refund. Endurance is not able to reopen claims for review on cancelled accounts.