I have been trying to have my refrigerator repaired for the last weeks nowIt has been leaking water all over my new floor which is now ruinedThe company has failed numerous times now to even get somebody to my residenceI'm beginning to wonder if they are a fraudulent business because you certainly don't get what you pay for!
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Okay so let me get this straight!!! When you received the estimates they were good enough to approve us for a ridiculous amount of $and we followed all that was requested of usNO one ever said those estimates were not good enoughAnd we WERE approved and covered on those damagesMaybe you should go back and re read the emails that you company sent, you are back tracking and trying not to pay the claim nowThen when we filed a complaint, you froze the payment and have been talking in circles and refusing to pay a reasonable amountNOW that we say just pay the original $that YOUR COMPANY agreed to payNOW those estimates are not good enough IF You want a breakdown of each estimate then YOU need to call those companies, YOU have all their informationApparently you don't like the way that companies run their businessesThese companies did give you estimates and are happy to answer any question that you may have in regards to the estimatesSo I guess its funny when it's time to pay the original amount of $ you don't want to,there was never an issue on that amountYour reviews speak volume on how you run your company Regards, ***
The Director of Operations has stated that you reached out to him with regards to scheduling the repairin lieu of your previously-requested buyoutAs your claim is still going through the processing stages due to the change and nothing may progress until the contractor's appointment, it appears no response is necessary to this complaint at this timeHowever, please be aware that the warranty has clearly disclosed terms and conditions detailing the exact issues you have complained about here: potential multiple deductibles, buyout amounts lower than retail, etcPlease reread the warranty thoroughly so you understand its restrictions, which you agreed to upon your purchase of this warranty
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I had spoken with the "third party" warranty company with full explanation of the item that needed replacing and was verbally told that it is not covered When I explained the item that needed replacing, the "third party" warranty company they would have stated how the claim should be filed I was told this cartridge is not covered therefore was no claim was written and no written denial was givenThis item should have been discovered at time of inspection, for which RWS guarantees the home inspectors findings, of which the inspector never checkedI feel that RWS gives new home owners a sense of coverage Regards, [redacted] ***
The homeowner, in his complaint to the Revdex.com, makes a series of accusations ranging from “contract breaches” to “failure to pay claims”, all of which are serious accusations that have never occurred with regards to ANY of the homeowner’s claims, all of which are broken down below: Claim #1: Garage DoorThis was the primary complaint the homeowner described in his Revdex.com submissionIt is true that his claim was approved, and it is true that a check was mailedUnfortunately, the check must have been lost in the mail as we have documentation it was mailed, but, after being made aware of the homeowner’s complaint, no documentation it has been cashedAs a result, a new check was cut immediately and was mailed todayIf the homeowner has not received it by mid-next week, please contact the company and ask for the Director of Operations, who has been tasked with personally ensuring the money reaches you expeditiouslyClaim #2: StructuralThe homeowner was notified that this claim was denied on October While this claim is prima facie outside the scope of the warranty, made clear by the ‘structural coverage summary’, the homeowner has also stated that this claim was “missed by the inspector”As the warranty only covers items that were “confirmed to be in good working condition at time of inspection, and excludes all others” [empadded], anything the inspector missed is not covered by the warrantyHowever, RWS operates in good faith at all times and, though the homeowner’s own statement denies coverage, RWS has reason to believe the homeowner was mistaken and it was NOT missed by the home inspectionUnfortunately, because the Home Inspector noted the flooring (page 19) as “flooring was wavy or not level in some areas”, a claim to fix a ‘wavy or not level floor’ as this claim states, is still excluded from coverageClaim #3: Air ConditionerThe air conditioner claim was denied because the warranty clearly states “This contract excludes all appliances, climate control systems, and fixtures over years old”The homeowner’s air conditioner was made in 1992, making the air conditioner twenty-four (24) years old and so clearly outside the scope of the warrantyClaim #4: Ceiling FanThis claim was denied because the home inspection clearly noted that the light was not working at the time of inspectionPer the terms of the warranty “This contract only covers those items that were confirmed to be in good working order at time of inspection and excludes all others”As the electrical system was stated as “requiring repair, replacement, and/or evaluation”, the flickering light is not covered under this warrantyTo expand, the home inspection report clearly puts the homeowner on notice of lighting issues by stating “one or more overcurrent protection devices were ‘double-tapped’, where or more wires were clamped in a terminal designed for only one wireThis is a safety hazard since the bolt or screw may tighten securely against one wire, but leave others loose A qualified electrician should evaluate and repair as necessary.” As the only estimate turned in gives no diagnosis (it only shows the contractor scheduling a time to diagnose) it is the homeowner’s responsibility to turn in the diagnosis so RWS can re-evaluate this claim, if necessary
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] FIRST OF ALL the satellite contractor DID NOT REMOVE any shingles or brackets to fix the problem, when he happened to be on the roof he noticed that we had roof damage, NO work or anything was touched on the roofI immediately called the inspector(Satellite contractor was still at home) he told me to contact RWS because we had a home warrantyWithin a day we had licensed and insured roofing companies that came out to inspect the roof, there was more damage to the roofThat had NOTHING to even do with a satellite ( wasn't even near the area of the satellites)They all said it should have been caught by the inspection because it WAS NOTHING HIDDEN.they all seen the issues from standing on the groundI only needed estimate and I sent your company I have spoken with Maddie, Kate, and NathanYou do have all estimates with what the contractors have found and all are almost identically with issues that the roof hasAfter we received the amount we were approved for we did call and ask why so low and kept getting the run aroundThey told me that they put the amount in system and that kicks out a number to what should be paidSo what is the point of estimates if you are not even going pay for the repairs!!!!RWS is well aware of all the damages, and has the estimates Yes we want it to be reevaluated and feel that we should be approve for at least the lowest estimates, because none of those companies will fix the problem for the ridiculous amount that your company is saying it should cost to fix the repairsALL the estimates came back within a couple hundred dollars of each other, and none of the them were near $to fix roofing issues.Estimates were from $1000.00-$if you need to look back at those Maddie in the day department has them, I also have complete copies of all emails, and estimates that was sent to RWS Regards, [redacted]
Thank you for bringing this to our attentionFirstly, please be aware that RWS will never be able to determine whether the failure is covered under the warranty until a diagnosis (estimate) is received from a qualified ContractorAs a result, RWS will never be able to tell you whether (or for how much) a claim will be approved until that estimate has been received and processed by RWSThis claim involved a main water line leak: under your Simple policy, which covers only “items falling within the perimeter of the foundation of the home”, this claim was precludedHowever, every Simple policy comes with a complimentary SewerGard guarantee, and so your RWS claims representative also filed your claim thereunder, in order to maximize your chances of coverageUnder the SewerGard policy, coverage is limited, with regards to water lines, to “the single lateral water service line from the point of the water utility’s connection to the point of the water meter or main shut off line inside the home”As a result, the sprinkler lines are not covered under SewerGardLastly, please note that, even if one of RWS’s networked Contractors had been close to your area, you would still be responsible for payment as this claim is a non-claim and therefore not covered under your policyMost of our homeowners love that RWS frequently allows them to use their own Contractors – it allows homeowners to work with a local company with whom they may have worked in the past and one that they pickWhile we’re sorry the homeowner is not thrilled with the outcome, she would be personally responsible for the costs of this repair regardless of what Contractor completed the repair
If the homeowner would please review the first response letter RWS sent with regards to this complaint, all of the questions being asked now have already been answered thereinAs stated earlier, a few times, the homeowner was given a choice of how she wanted to proceed and RWS was happy to oblige, whatever her decisionShe made a decision to NOT receive her buyout and instead have her claim reevaluated, as documented in her Revdex.com responses, which the company honoredNow, it appears she changed her mind with which option she wants, which she has not communicated to RWS in any form (including Revdex.com responses up to this point), instead blaming the company for not moving things forward even when she has been told, repeatedly, that there wasn’t enough information to move forward with the reevaluation, which she was informed of even before she made her decision RWS’s answer remains the sameShe was given a choice, the choice was made, and the Company awaits the informationThe problems with the invoices have been detailed repeatedly, including providing copies of the invoices we have, to illustrate their deficiencies with the policy itself and all the homeowner has to do is submit one itemized estimateAs stated earlier, if she would like to have her contractor contact RWS for exact details of what the policy requires, we’re happy to speak with them If the homeowner wants to receive the buyout, an option she declined originally, which is the ONLY reason RWS froze her check, we are happy to oblige – she simply needs to tell us, clearly, which option will settle this issue once and for allHowever, due to her changing her mind, refusing to work with RWS, and accusing RWS at every turn of trying to cheat her, there are some stipulations now attached to this buyoutThe homeowner must acknowledge, prior to the check being sent, that the $check is in full settlement of her claim; that she will seek no other forms of redress against the companyOnce this has been received, RWS is more than happy to honor the homeowner's change of mind and process her buyout check, as originally planned, and get it to her as soon as possibleIf RWS receives her answer through the Revdex.com by 5pm today, the check will be mailed tomorrowOtherwise, it will be mailed next week
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaintFor your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThe response of Residential Warranty Service (RWS)’s representative shows that they are ether confused about the facts or willfully trying to mislead the readerIt was RWS’s Contractor who came representing RWS and solicited me into agreementRWS’s Contractor did not fulfill the part of the agreement that required him to install a Primary Sump Pump and baSump Pump both made by the “Zoeller Company” and to give me a copy of the purchasing receipt for the sump pump he just purchasedAlthough caught after paying the Contractor $1000; It was discovered that the contractor actually only installed a BaSump Pump made by the Zoeller Company and he used the same primary sump pump that was installed on the previous day and, which I explained to him earlier that I had some quality concerns aboutI tried to contact the Contractor only a few hours after he had left my house to confront him on what I discoveredAfter at least, emails attempts, telephone attempts, all of which went to voicemail; I left message requested that he come and uninstall the basump pump system and give me a full refundOr, if he sends me a return address I will hire someone to uninstall the equipment and I ship it to himThe contractor finally responded almost two days later and said “I agreed to what was installed and paid for it” and hung up the phoneFrom the start of this discovery, I reported this incident to RWS management about the deceitful practice of one of their representatives/ContractorsRWS’s Management stated that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorI explained to RWS management that the Contractor was avoiding me and basically told me that I wasn’t entitled to a refund because I had agreed and then paid for what was installed; even though I expressed to the Contractor my dissatisfaction of what was installed and offered to pay to have the equipment uninstall and shipped to him all at my costRWS sided with the Contractor and further claim that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract, and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorSince the contractor was not responding to me I asked RWS Management for the Contractor’s place of business or an address to where I can send his equipmentRWS’s Management refused to give me the Contractor’s shipping addressI then suggested that I can ship the equipment to RWS, the manager again say “no, don’t send it here either” I never received the purchase receipt from the Contractor that would show the cost of the sump pump and all of its componentsThrough researching the varies prices of sump pumps, I called several local sump pump distributors of the Zoeller Primary and BaSump pumps systemI found out that the cost of the Zoeller primary and basump pump system together (model 970) cost $According to the distributors I contacted, a Zoeller bapump system average cost is between $-$I also spoke with other Plumbers in the Industry who states that it’s a good chance that the basump pump was not newSince the Contractor came to my location operating as a representative for RWS; RWS is liable for the Contractors conduct and actions Regardless of whether the basump pump was a covered item in the Warranty ContractThe Contractor committed FraudTherefore, both parties can be named in a fraudulent criminal or civil proceeding, either individually or jointlyRegards, [redacted] Because of the fraudulent act of one of its representatives, I request RWS refund me $ Regards, [redacted]
I have had RWS for going on years Every time I have had a service call they have gotten someone out there that day or the next day depending on time of day that I have called Their technicians always fixed the problem or RWS replaced it I have referred a family member and a few friends whom have also had a great experience with the company
We here at RWS sincerely apologize that the homeowner has felt slighted by our response – it was never our intention to question her claims; simply to point out where some confusion may have lain as the failed unit was never mentioned and no documents pertaining to a failed unit were ever submitted to RWS, despite the multiple communicationsAs the majority of the information contained in the homeowner’s response has already been addressed in prior communications, we have only addressed, in this response, the new item included and clarified an accusation leveled by the homeowner which, by her response, was misunderstood initially: Firstly, the phone records provided match up with the RWS records, as discussed and referenced in previous responsesSecondly, RWS's final approval process takes up to business days (which excludes holidays and weekends), putting the homeowner's claim's finalization date as OctoberTrue to form, on October, the approval process was being finalized when it was realized that the homeowner had no actual failure or even issue, that the repairs were ‘recommended’, that there was no documentation showing the homeowner ever had the ‘recommended repairs completed’, no proof that the ‘recommended repairs’ were necessary, multiple ‘recommended repairs’ (i.eoptions) that purported to fix the same issue, and that the contractor stated there were no failures or even issues! At this point, the amount was adjusted accordingly and the buyout check mailed out immediately, per company policyRWS has addressed all of the questions and concerns raised with regards to this claim, all backed by our policy and nothing in this most recent correspondence changes any of the facts upon which the claim decision was made - if this changes, the homeowner is urged to reach out to RWS so that we can re-audit the claim, if appropriateThank you
I purchased a house in January of 2015, the microwave was not working when I moved in so I was referred to Residential Warranty Services Inc, 90days warrantyI sent the estimate of the repair within the time limit and received a lettter stating that the claim was approvedI wait for almost a month and since I didn't receive a check, I called [redacted] the claim representativeshe never returned any of my phone callsfinally, I spoke with customer service asking for a supervisor, she told me it was ***when she finally got on the phone was extremely rude and when I ask her what the check was taking so long she got upset and told me it was not until the end of March that the check might be issuewhen I ask for the Corporate person to file a complaint, she just hung up the phone
RevDex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will accept the $375, no strings attached. Check to be received in no more than 3 business days. Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThis case has not been resolved to my satisfaction at this point We have not received the $that they said they would send us in their response [redacted] ***
We here at RWS are sorry the homeowner feels owed more money but, pursuant to her policy, RWS has fulfilled all obligations and even, despite the homeowner's obvious feelings to the contrary, going above and beyond in order to cover as much of her claim as was possibleWith regards to the homeowner’s response, please review RWS’s previous responses, as all points mentioned herein have been discussed previously
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThe real invoice is attachedThis is the one the service guy gave meNotice; only charge is deductibleAlso notice, recommendationsI also have the text msg from the service guy saying he only used little freon just to start the AC Regards, [redacted] ***
This claim was called in 18 February 2016 and the homeowner was given permission to use her own contractor, so long as they submitted a diagnosis and estimate to us before any work was... completed. The next day we were contacted by a panicked homeowner, who told us that her contractor (to whom she had already paid a 50% deposit for the entirety of his proposed estimate) had damaged her home and, while she couldn’t work with him, he wouldn’t return her money. On her behalf, our Director of Operations went above and beyond his required job duties and called this contractor, with whom we had no previous relationship, and convinced him to return ALL of her money. At that point, due to the homeowner wanting to work with another contractor, a new diagnosis and estimate was required, which were submitted in late March. At that point, based on the new estimate, it was clear that the damage was not covered under her policy and so it was denied. We here at RWS are honestly surprised to hear the allegations put forth by this homeowner, especially after we intervened and saved her over a thousand dollars due to her own contractor’s mistake because at no point has anyone ever been told they would automatically receive the maximum amount under a claim or that we have no approval process. It seems disingenuous to assert an honest belief that a home warranty company, once contacted with a claim, would automatically issue the maximum amount of coverage with the homeowner simply having to turn in an invoice after the fact.
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] I am fine to have the machine fixed if you're going to pay for itAll I am asking is to be made wholeIf it is repaired, I want it to workIf it is replaced, I want a fair value to replace it with a comparable dishwasherI have repeated said I will settle for $ The facts from the beginning are this: I contacted RWS when my dishwasher brokeThis is the first time I've used a home warrantyI spoke with Katie, and she told me it would be best to contact my own repair service for the estimateI reached out to a local appliance repair companyThey came out and gave me an estimate of $1,When I sent you this estimate, I noted that it would save you money just to replace it and pasted a link to a comparable machine valued around $You offered me $You said that because there were two broken components, I owed two deductibles even though it was for one service callWe have since gone back-and-forthYou suggested I called a repair man of your choiceI have done thatHe suggested he can fix it for less than the original estimate (He has not seen the machine yet)I am happy to have him do that if you are going to pay for itOtherwise, I would accept $to replace the dishwasherA new dishwasher is going to cost me slightly over $If we take $and minus the deductible, it is $I am asking for $If you believe it will save you money to repair the machine, I can give your mechanic a call back and set up a time for him to see the machine Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"> Re: Complaint ID [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: We are in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his refrigerator claim On Saturday August 9, at 1:pm we received a voicemail on our after hours non emergency voicemail system stating that they just moved into the home and the refrigerator wasn’t working On Monday August 11, at 9:am our office returned his call to let him know that we did not have a warranty for the property located at [redacted] , [redacted] *** On August 12, at 9:am our office was informed by [redacted] that the check was issued and mailed to Home Warranty of America (a different warranty company) for the property located at [redacted] , [redacted] *** At this point [redacted] said that they would get the funds from Home Warranty of America and issue us a check in the amount of $for the home warranty We were provided with an image of check # [redacted] payable to Residential Warranty Services (RWS) On August 13, at 10:am our office created a warranty for the property at [redacted] , [redacted] *** On August 13, at 10:am our office created a claim for Mr [redacted] s refrigerator At 10:am our office contacted the homeowner to let him know that we needed a copy of their home inspection report and the signed policy notice (this is a form that requires a signature prior to filing any claims) The homeowner called RWS at 12:pm wanting to file the claim He was advised that the claim had been started, but we cannot move forward until we received the home inspection report and policy notice 8/14/2:pm Received requested information via email from the homeowner8/14/2:pm our office contacted the homeowner to let him know that he was free to call the contractor of his choice and to call with the diagnosis and cost to repair prior to having any work done The homeowner refused and wanted us to send out our contractor On 8/15/2:pm Homeowner called our office stating that they have not heard from our contractor yet he was advised again he was free to use his own contractor and he again refused We advised we would get in touch with our contractor, when our office called voicemail picked up and we left all pertinent information and requested a call back 8/19/4:pm Homeowner left a voicemail for the year warranty manager (her shift ends at pm EST) that he wanted this issue fixed now8/20/ 8:am The message that was left for the manager was given to the supervisor to contact the homeowner When the supervisor called, he received Mr [redacted] s voicemail but left a message letting him know that the appliance repair company that we use in the [redacted] area was booked and were not available until the week of August 25, He is still free to use his own contractor and that we would pay anything over his deductible over the phone to the contractor of his choice 8/20/4: pm Homeowner called into our office demanding to know why this hasn’t been fixed He claims to never have received the voicemail left by our office He was once again given the option of using his own contractor for the repair As of August 21, RWS has yet to be paid for the home warranty at [redacted] , [redacted] *** We have gone above and beyond attempting to get the issue resolved for the homeowner We sincerely regret any inconvenience that Mr [redacted] may have experienced with his claim; however, Residential Warranty Services made an exception to typical procedure due to Mr [redacted] ’s circumstances by accepting a claim prior to the policy being paid for [redacted] Director of Operations Residential Warranty Services
Ms [redacted] states that she “never made any statements to RSW [sic] about having another company look at the problem” yet we spoke to her on May wherein she stated that another company came out and ran a camera through the pipes, a service [redacted] does not offer at this timeBased on [redacted] ’s notes, this third company was [redacted] Ms [redacted] then told both us and [redacted] , separately, that [redacted] believed the issue to be a city issue due to the video findings, and urged her to contact the city to investigateAs a result, RWS was waiting to hear from the homeowner as to whether the city needed to fix the issueWe heard nothing from the homeowner until this Revdex.com complaint was filed As this was indicated, by the homeowner and a contractor, to be a city issue, RWS cannot move forward with the repair until the city has investigatedMs [redacted] was informed of this on June 2016, prior to her most recent response wherein she stated she was going to gather more information to supplement her report to the cityDespite this notification, she still filed a Revdex.com response a few days later claiming otherwiseAt this point, the homeowner has still not informed us of the city’s investigation, nor provided any documentation of the same but, as soon as we are provided their findings, we will most certainly move forward with Ms [redacted] ’s claim to get her taken care of
I have been trying to have my refrigerator repaired for the last weeks nowIt has been leaking water all over my new floor which is now ruinedThe company has failed numerous times now to even get somebody to my residenceI'm beginning to wonder if they are a fraudulent business because you certainly don't get what you pay for!
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Okay so let me get this straight!!! When you received the estimates they were good enough to approve us for a ridiculous amount of $and we followed all that was requested of usNO one ever said those estimates were not good enoughAnd we WERE approved and covered on those damagesMaybe you should go back and re read the emails that you company sent, you are back tracking and trying not to pay the claim nowThen when we filed a complaint, you froze the payment and have been talking in circles and refusing to pay a reasonable amountNOW that we say just pay the original $that YOUR COMPANY agreed to payNOW those estimates are not good enough IF You want a breakdown of each estimate then YOU need to call those companies, YOU have all their informationApparently you don't like the way that companies run their businessesThese companies did give you estimates and are happy to answer any question that you may have in regards to the estimatesSo I guess its funny when it's time to pay the original amount of $ you don't want to,there was never an issue on that amountYour reviews speak volume on how you run your company Regards, ***
The Director of Operations has stated that you reached out to him with regards to scheduling the repairin lieu of your previously-requested buyoutAs your claim is still going through the processing stages due to the change and nothing may progress until the contractor's appointment, it appears no response is necessary to this complaint at this timeHowever, please be aware that the warranty has clearly disclosed terms and conditions detailing the exact issues you have complained about here: potential multiple deductibles, buyout amounts lower than retail, etcPlease reread the warranty thoroughly so you understand its restrictions, which you agreed to upon your purchase of this warranty
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I had spoken with the "third party" warranty company with full explanation of the item that needed replacing and was verbally told that it is not covered When I explained the item that needed replacing, the "third party" warranty company they would have stated how the claim should be filed I was told this cartridge is not covered therefore was no claim was written and no written denial was givenThis item should have been discovered at time of inspection, for which RWS guarantees the home inspectors findings, of which the inspector never checkedI feel that RWS gives new home owners a sense of coverage Regards, [redacted] ***
The homeowner, in his complaint to the Revdex.com, makes a series of accusations ranging from “contract breaches” to “failure to pay claims”, all of which are serious accusations that have never occurred with regards to ANY of the homeowner’s claims, all of which are broken down below: Claim #1: Garage DoorThis was the primary complaint the homeowner described in his Revdex.com submissionIt is true that his claim was approved, and it is true that a check was mailedUnfortunately, the check must have been lost in the mail as we have documentation it was mailed, but, after being made aware of the homeowner’s complaint, no documentation it has been cashedAs a result, a new check was cut immediately and was mailed todayIf the homeowner has not received it by mid-next week, please contact the company and ask for the Director of Operations, who has been tasked with personally ensuring the money reaches you expeditiouslyClaim #2: StructuralThe homeowner was notified that this claim was denied on October While this claim is prima facie outside the scope of the warranty, made clear by the ‘structural coverage summary’, the homeowner has also stated that this claim was “missed by the inspector”As the warranty only covers items that were “confirmed to be in good working condition at time of inspection, and excludes all others” [empadded], anything the inspector missed is not covered by the warrantyHowever, RWS operates in good faith at all times and, though the homeowner’s own statement denies coverage, RWS has reason to believe the homeowner was mistaken and it was NOT missed by the home inspectionUnfortunately, because the Home Inspector noted the flooring (page 19) as “flooring was wavy or not level in some areas”, a claim to fix a ‘wavy or not level floor’ as this claim states, is still excluded from coverageClaim #3: Air ConditionerThe air conditioner claim was denied because the warranty clearly states “This contract excludes all appliances, climate control systems, and fixtures over years old”The homeowner’s air conditioner was made in 1992, making the air conditioner twenty-four (24) years old and so clearly outside the scope of the warrantyClaim #4: Ceiling FanThis claim was denied because the home inspection clearly noted that the light was not working at the time of inspectionPer the terms of the warranty “This contract only covers those items that were confirmed to be in good working order at time of inspection and excludes all others”As the electrical system was stated as “requiring repair, replacement, and/or evaluation”, the flickering light is not covered under this warrantyTo expand, the home inspection report clearly puts the homeowner on notice of lighting issues by stating “one or more overcurrent protection devices were ‘double-tapped’, where or more wires were clamped in a terminal designed for only one wireThis is a safety hazard since the bolt or screw may tighten securely against one wire, but leave others loose A qualified electrician should evaluate and repair as necessary.” As the only estimate turned in gives no diagnosis (it only shows the contractor scheduling a time to diagnose) it is the homeowner’s responsibility to turn in the diagnosis so RWS can re-evaluate this claim, if necessary
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] FIRST OF ALL the satellite contractor DID NOT REMOVE any shingles or brackets to fix the problem, when he happened to be on the roof he noticed that we had roof damage, NO work or anything was touched on the roofI immediately called the inspector(Satellite contractor was still at home) he told me to contact RWS because we had a home warrantyWithin a day we had licensed and insured roofing companies that came out to inspect the roof, there was more damage to the roofThat had NOTHING to even do with a satellite ( wasn't even near the area of the satellites)They all said it should have been caught by the inspection because it WAS NOTHING HIDDEN.they all seen the issues from standing on the groundI only needed estimate and I sent your company I have spoken with Maddie, Kate, and NathanYou do have all estimates with what the contractors have found and all are almost identically with issues that the roof hasAfter we received the amount we were approved for we did call and ask why so low and kept getting the run aroundThey told me that they put the amount in system and that kicks out a number to what should be paidSo what is the point of estimates if you are not even going pay for the repairs!!!!RWS is well aware of all the damages, and has the estimates Yes we want it to be reevaluated and feel that we should be approve for at least the lowest estimates, because none of those companies will fix the problem for the ridiculous amount that your company is saying it should cost to fix the repairsALL the estimates came back within a couple hundred dollars of each other, and none of the them were near $to fix roofing issues.Estimates were from $1000.00-$if you need to look back at those Maddie in the day department has them, I also have complete copies of all emails, and estimates that was sent to RWS Regards, [redacted]
Thank you for bringing this to our attentionFirstly, please be aware that RWS will never be able to determine whether the failure is covered under the warranty until a diagnosis (estimate) is received from a qualified ContractorAs a result, RWS will never be able to tell you whether (or for how much) a claim will be approved until that estimate has been received and processed by RWSThis claim involved a main water line leak: under your Simple policy, which covers only “items falling within the perimeter of the foundation of the home”, this claim was precludedHowever, every Simple policy comes with a complimentary SewerGard guarantee, and so your RWS claims representative also filed your claim thereunder, in order to maximize your chances of coverageUnder the SewerGard policy, coverage is limited, with regards to water lines, to “the single lateral water service line from the point of the water utility’s connection to the point of the water meter or main shut off line inside the home”As a result, the sprinkler lines are not covered under SewerGardLastly, please note that, even if one of RWS’s networked Contractors had been close to your area, you would still be responsible for payment as this claim is a non-claim and therefore not covered under your policyMost of our homeowners love that RWS frequently allows them to use their own Contractors – it allows homeowners to work with a local company with whom they may have worked in the past and one that they pickWhile we’re sorry the homeowner is not thrilled with the outcome, she would be personally responsible for the costs of this repair regardless of what Contractor completed the repair
If the homeowner would please review the first response letter RWS sent with regards to this complaint, all of the questions being asked now have already been answered thereinAs stated earlier, a few times, the homeowner was given a choice of how she wanted to proceed and RWS was happy to oblige, whatever her decisionShe made a decision to NOT receive her buyout and instead have her claim reevaluated, as documented in her Revdex.com responses, which the company honoredNow, it appears she changed her mind with which option she wants, which she has not communicated to RWS in any form (including Revdex.com responses up to this point), instead blaming the company for not moving things forward even when she has been told, repeatedly, that there wasn’t enough information to move forward with the reevaluation, which she was informed of even before she made her decision RWS’s answer remains the sameShe was given a choice, the choice was made, and the Company awaits the informationThe problems with the invoices have been detailed repeatedly, including providing copies of the invoices we have, to illustrate their deficiencies with the policy itself and all the homeowner has to do is submit one itemized estimateAs stated earlier, if she would like to have her contractor contact RWS for exact details of what the policy requires, we’re happy to speak with them If the homeowner wants to receive the buyout, an option she declined originally, which is the ONLY reason RWS froze her check, we are happy to oblige – she simply needs to tell us, clearly, which option will settle this issue once and for allHowever, due to her changing her mind, refusing to work with RWS, and accusing RWS at every turn of trying to cheat her, there are some stipulations now attached to this buyoutThe homeowner must acknowledge, prior to the check being sent, that the $check is in full settlement of her claim; that she will seek no other forms of redress against the companyOnce this has been received, RWS is more than happy to honor the homeowner's change of mind and process her buyout check, as originally planned, and get it to her as soon as possibleIf RWS receives her answer through the Revdex.com by 5pm today, the check will be mailed tomorrowOtherwise, it will be mailed next week
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaintFor your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThe response of Residential Warranty Service (RWS)’s representative shows that they are ether confused about the facts or willfully trying to mislead the readerIt was RWS’s Contractor who came representing RWS and solicited me into agreementRWS’s Contractor did not fulfill the part of the agreement that required him to install a Primary Sump Pump and baSump Pump both made by the “Zoeller Company” and to give me a copy of the purchasing receipt for the sump pump he just purchasedAlthough caught after paying the Contractor $1000; It was discovered that the contractor actually only installed a BaSump Pump made by the Zoeller Company and he used the same primary sump pump that was installed on the previous day and, which I explained to him earlier that I had some quality concerns aboutI tried to contact the Contractor only a few hours after he had left my house to confront him on what I discoveredAfter at least, emails attempts, telephone attempts, all of which went to voicemail; I left message requested that he come and uninstall the basump pump system and give me a full refundOr, if he sends me a return address I will hire someone to uninstall the equipment and I ship it to himThe contractor finally responded almost two days later and said “I agreed to what was installed and paid for it” and hung up the phoneFrom the start of this discovery, I reported this incident to RWS management about the deceitful practice of one of their representatives/ContractorsRWS’s Management stated that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorI explained to RWS management that the Contractor was avoiding me and basically told me that I wasn’t entitled to a refund because I had agreed and then paid for what was installed; even though I expressed to the Contractor my dissatisfaction of what was installed and offered to pay to have the equipment uninstall and shipped to him all at my costRWS sided with the Contractor and further claim that this issue was not covered by the Warranty Contract, and therefore an issue solely between me and the contactorSince the contractor was not responding to me I asked RWS Management for the Contractor’s place of business or an address to where I can send his equipmentRWS’s Management refused to give me the Contractor’s shipping addressI then suggested that I can ship the equipment to RWS, the manager again say “no, don’t send it here either” I never received the purchase receipt from the Contractor that would show the cost of the sump pump and all of its componentsThrough researching the varies prices of sump pumps, I called several local sump pump distributors of the Zoeller Primary and BaSump pumps systemI found out that the cost of the Zoeller primary and basump pump system together (model 970) cost $According to the distributors I contacted, a Zoeller bapump system average cost is between $-$I also spoke with other Plumbers in the Industry who states that it’s a good chance that the basump pump was not newSince the Contractor came to my location operating as a representative for RWS; RWS is liable for the Contractors conduct and actions Regardless of whether the basump pump was a covered item in the Warranty ContractThe Contractor committed FraudTherefore, both parties can be named in a fraudulent criminal or civil proceeding, either individually or jointlyRegards, [redacted] Because of the fraudulent act of one of its representatives, I request RWS refund me $ Regards, [redacted]
I have had RWS for going on years Every time I have had a service call they have gotten someone out there that day or the next day depending on time of day that I have called Their technicians always fixed the problem or RWS replaced it I have referred a family member and a few friends whom have also had a great experience with the company
We here at RWS sincerely apologize that the homeowner has felt slighted by our response – it was never our intention to question her claims; simply to point out where some confusion may have lain as the failed unit was never mentioned and no documents pertaining to a failed unit were ever submitted to RWS, despite the multiple communicationsAs the majority of the information contained in the homeowner’s response has already been addressed in prior communications, we have only addressed, in this response, the new item included and clarified an accusation leveled by the homeowner which, by her response, was misunderstood initially: Firstly, the phone records provided match up with the RWS records, as discussed and referenced in previous responsesSecondly, RWS's final approval process takes up to business days (which excludes holidays and weekends), putting the homeowner's claim's finalization date as OctoberTrue to form, on October, the approval process was being finalized when it was realized that the homeowner had no actual failure or even issue, that the repairs were ‘recommended’, that there was no documentation showing the homeowner ever had the ‘recommended repairs completed’, no proof that the ‘recommended repairs’ were necessary, multiple ‘recommended repairs’ (i.eoptions) that purported to fix the same issue, and that the contractor stated there were no failures or even issues! At this point, the amount was adjusted accordingly and the buyout check mailed out immediately, per company policyRWS has addressed all of the questions and concerns raised with regards to this claim, all backed by our policy and nothing in this most recent correspondence changes any of the facts upon which the claim decision was made - if this changes, the homeowner is urged to reach out to RWS so that we can re-audit the claim, if appropriateThank you
I purchased a house in January of 2015, the microwave was not working when I moved in so I was referred to Residential Warranty Services Inc, 90days warrantyI sent the estimate of the repair within the time limit and received a lettter stating that the claim was approvedI wait for almost a month and since I didn't receive a check, I called [redacted] the claim representativeshe never returned any of my phone callsfinally, I spoke with customer service asking for a supervisor, she told me it was ***when she finally got on the phone was extremely rude and when I ask her what the check was taking so long she got upset and told me it was not until the end of March that the check might be issuewhen I ask for the Corporate person to file a complaint, she just hung up the phone
RevDex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will accept the $375, no strings attached. Check to be received in no more than 3 business days. Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThis case has not been resolved to my satisfaction at this point We have not received the $that they said they would send us in their response [redacted] ***
We here at RWS are sorry the homeowner feels owed more money but, pursuant to her policy, RWS has fulfilled all obligations and even, despite the homeowner's obvious feelings to the contrary, going above and beyond in order to cover as much of her claim as was possibleWith regards to the homeowner’s response, please review RWS’s previous responses, as all points mentioned herein have been discussed previously
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear belowThe real invoice is attachedThis is the one the service guy gave meNotice; only charge is deductibleAlso notice, recommendationsI also have the text msg from the service guy saying he only used little freon just to start the AC Regards, [redacted] ***
This claim was called in 18 February 2016 and the homeowner was given permission to use her own contractor, so long as they submitted a diagnosis and estimate to us before any work was... completed. The next day we were contacted by a panicked homeowner, who told us that her contractor (to whom she had already paid a 50% deposit for the entirety of his proposed estimate) had damaged her home and, while she couldn’t work with him, he wouldn’t return her money. On her behalf, our Director of Operations went above and beyond his required job duties and called this contractor, with whom we had no previous relationship, and convinced him to return ALL of her money. At that point, due to the homeowner wanting to work with another contractor, a new diagnosis and estimate was required, which were submitted in late March. At that point, based on the new estimate, it was clear that the damage was not covered under her policy and so it was denied. We here at RWS are honestly surprised to hear the allegations put forth by this homeowner, especially after we intervened and saved her over a thousand dollars due to her own contractor’s mistake because at no point has anyone ever been told they would automatically receive the maximum amount under a claim or that we have no approval process. It seems disingenuous to assert an honest belief that a home warranty company, once contacted with a claim, would automatically issue the maximum amount of coverage with the homeowner simply having to turn in an invoice after the fact.
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] I am fine to have the machine fixed if you're going to pay for itAll I am asking is to be made wholeIf it is repaired, I want it to workIf it is replaced, I want a fair value to replace it with a comparable dishwasherI have repeated said I will settle for $ The facts from the beginning are this: I contacted RWS when my dishwasher brokeThis is the first time I've used a home warrantyI spoke with Katie, and she told me it would be best to contact my own repair service for the estimateI reached out to a local appliance repair companyThey came out and gave me an estimate of $1,When I sent you this estimate, I noted that it would save you money just to replace it and pasted a link to a comparable machine valued around $You offered me $You said that because there were two broken components, I owed two deductibles even though it was for one service callWe have since gone back-and-forthYou suggested I called a repair man of your choiceI have done thatHe suggested he can fix it for less than the original estimate (He has not seen the machine yet)I am happy to have him do that if you are going to pay for itOtherwise, I would accept $to replace the dishwasherA new dishwasher is going to cost me slightly over $If we take $and minus the deductible, it is $I am asking for $If you believe it will save you money to repair the machine, I can give your mechanic a call back and set up a time for him to see the machine Regards, [redacted] ***
Revdex.com of Central Indiana N Delaware Street # Indianapolis IN class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"> Re: Complaint ID [redacted] To Whom It May Concern: We are in receipt of the complaint filed by [redacted] regarding his refrigerator claim On Saturday August 9, at 1:pm we received a voicemail on our after hours non emergency voicemail system stating that they just moved into the home and the refrigerator wasn’t working On Monday August 11, at 9:am our office returned his call to let him know that we did not have a warranty for the property located at [redacted] , [redacted] *** On August 12, at 9:am our office was informed by [redacted] that the check was issued and mailed to Home Warranty of America (a different warranty company) for the property located at [redacted] , [redacted] *** At this point [redacted] said that they would get the funds from Home Warranty of America and issue us a check in the amount of $for the home warranty We were provided with an image of check # [redacted] payable to Residential Warranty Services (RWS) On August 13, at 10:am our office created a warranty for the property at [redacted] , [redacted] *** On August 13, at 10:am our office created a claim for Mr [redacted] s refrigerator At 10:am our office contacted the homeowner to let him know that we needed a copy of their home inspection report and the signed policy notice (this is a form that requires a signature prior to filing any claims) The homeowner called RWS at 12:pm wanting to file the claim He was advised that the claim had been started, but we cannot move forward until we received the home inspection report and policy notice 8/14/2:pm Received requested information via email from the homeowner8/14/2:pm our office contacted the homeowner to let him know that he was free to call the contractor of his choice and to call with the diagnosis and cost to repair prior to having any work done The homeowner refused and wanted us to send out our contractor On 8/15/2:pm Homeowner called our office stating that they have not heard from our contractor yet he was advised again he was free to use his own contractor and he again refused We advised we would get in touch with our contractor, when our office called voicemail picked up and we left all pertinent information and requested a call back 8/19/4:pm Homeowner left a voicemail for the year warranty manager (her shift ends at pm EST) that he wanted this issue fixed now8/20/ 8:am The message that was left for the manager was given to the supervisor to contact the homeowner When the supervisor called, he received Mr [redacted] s voicemail but left a message letting him know that the appliance repair company that we use in the [redacted] area was booked and were not available until the week of August 25, He is still free to use his own contractor and that we would pay anything over his deductible over the phone to the contractor of his choice 8/20/4: pm Homeowner called into our office demanding to know why this hasn’t been fixed He claims to never have received the voicemail left by our office He was once again given the option of using his own contractor for the repair As of August 21, RWS has yet to be paid for the home warranty at [redacted] , [redacted] *** We have gone above and beyond attempting to get the issue resolved for the homeowner We sincerely regret any inconvenience that Mr [redacted] may have experienced with his claim; however, Residential Warranty Services made an exception to typical procedure due to Mr [redacted] ’s circumstances by accepting a claim prior to the policy being paid for [redacted] Director of Operations Residential Warranty Services
Ms [redacted] states that she “never made any statements to RSW [sic] about having another company look at the problem” yet we spoke to her on May wherein she stated that another company came out and ran a camera through the pipes, a service [redacted] does not offer at this timeBased on [redacted] ’s notes, this third company was [redacted] Ms [redacted] then told both us and [redacted] , separately, that [redacted] believed the issue to be a city issue due to the video findings, and urged her to contact the city to investigateAs a result, RWS was waiting to hear from the homeowner as to whether the city needed to fix the issueWe heard nothing from the homeowner until this Revdex.com complaint was filed As this was indicated, by the homeowner and a contractor, to be a city issue, RWS cannot move forward with the repair until the city has investigatedMs [redacted] was informed of this on June 2016, prior to her most recent response wherein she stated she was going to gather more information to supplement her report to the cityDespite this notification, she still filed a Revdex.com response a few days later claiming otherwiseAt this point, the homeowner has still not informed us of the city’s investigation, nor provided any documentation of the same but, as soon as we are provided their findings, we will most certainly move forward with Ms [redacted] ’s claim to get her taken care of