Guardian Warranty

About one year ago, I bought a wooden table and bonded leather sofas from Easy Life Furniture with a five year warranty from Guardian Warranty Services. So today, I decided to call about the cat scratches that I have on my sofa arm. I clearly remember the worker as Easy Life told me if I get cat scratches this warranty will cover the sofa and any scratches on my sofa will be covered as well. So today was the day I called as I told the representative about my sofa and water rings that I have from cups and scratches she decides to put me on hold and says my warranty will not cover that. But here is what it says on the warranty on the top of the warranty, coverage for leather or vinyl upholstered furniture #3. Accidental rips, cuts, burns and punctures. Then if you go down to another section here is what it states that willful abuse or misuse of the covered item, furniture that has been purposely torn, neglected abused or mishandled, or damaged including pet or animal damage. Now tell me, do animals do things willfully?

I would like you to read this warranty and tell me that it's bogus because on top it says one thing and the bottom another. I feel it is dishonest and should let their big buyers such as Easy Life furniture have the client and workers read it thoroughly to ensure they are giving the correct information. As for the water rings, the representative informed me that I need to call within five days of the incident. Who is going to call to clean one water ring and scratches? I figured I have a five year warranty, so one water ring won't kill me. But now that I have a few after I used their product, they should fix it. I hope this makes sense. I am very bothered by this whole situation. I would like if you can possibly read this warranty and if I'm not over reacting.

I purchased an extended warranty for a 2004 VW Passat with 1.8t. VW is already involved in a class-action lawsuit regarding sludge build up in this engine, causing catastrophic failure ($6,000 to replace). Claim was filed on my behalf by Cochran VW in Pittsburgh. After almost two weeks, GWC sent a man out to confirm the issue, then promptly denied my claim for inadequate servicing of the engine. This is EXACTLY the known issue with this vehicle. It is my opinion that neither of these companies is behaving honestly and a thorough investigation of this is in order. I've contacted my attorney regarding this matter and I would love to hear from other aggrieved parties.

The purchase is in Mercedes-Benz auto-expo in Great Neck, New York. I got an extended warranty from the dealership called Guardian Warranty Corporation. I sold the Mercedes-Benz to another dealership as trade in. I called the warranty company and they told me that I could not get a refund on warranty. On the contract, I did not press this no refund.

Statement of complaint: I bought a 2002 Volvo S60 from an individual (private party) and accordingly transferred his warranty into my name. This warranty was with Guardian Corporation.

Unfortunately, I had to have the car in the shop to repair a rear differential and a transmission. During this time, I was driving a rent-a-car so time was money. Guardian only covers $25/day for rental cars for 4 days. 3 business days after the inspector reviewed my car (6 days after Guardian had been notified) Tom told my mechanic that Guardian would cover over $5,000, but would not give her anything in writing. Then, over the next 3 days, my mechanic followed up with Tom and Ed to get official approval and she was told that all actions were waiting on the owner. After never receiving a single phone call from Guardian, I hear about this through my mechanic. I call Guardian immediately. My adjuster, Tom at ext.118 tells me that he will only cover $3,000 saying that he previously mis-stated the number to my mechanic. When I asked him to break that down, he said that he would only cover ~$800 for the transmission (a part which was replaced with a refurbished transmission by County Transmissions through Guardian cost Guardian $3,000 alone in Fall of 2008). ~$300 for the door switch, and the rest was the rear differential. I do not know these numbers exactly because when I asked for these numbers in writing, Tom refused. I requested to be transferred to the manager, Ed at ext.111, who stated that the $5,000 conversation with my mechanic never happened. I am not sure how he can make such a bold statement.

Those are all sincere frustrations that I would like resolved, but my stopping point right now is my rear differential. I have contacted everyone that I know that specializes in repairing Volvos after the year 2000, and every single person tells me that the only way to replace a rear differential on this car is to buy a brand new part from Volvo (I believe at a cost of over $5000). I am told that the used part may render my car undriveable. Tom said that he read in "All Data" that a change to my vehicle's database could get around this problem. I asked him for his source, and its reference. He refused to provide it. I have since asked Ed for the source and reference, and he also refused to provide it. However, Ed did mention that Guardian's sole objective is to make sure that every part in my car is in mechanically working order, and the software was not his responsibility. Here in lies my concern. I am sincerely concerned that Guardian is going to leave me with a used part in my Volvo, which does not drive. Ed's criteria would be satisfied because everything mechanical is in working order. When I asked Ed for a written assurance that Guardian would pay for all mechanical labor required to get my car into drivable condition, he refused to give me a verbal assurance, and he continued to state that he would provide nothing in writing.

I then asked Tom and Ed for a written price estimate with reference-able parts so that my mechanic can utilize the used parts that Tom found so cheaply ($3,000 would not cover used parts according to my mechanic). They would not give me these references, nor would they give me a written quotation. They refused my requests.

Ed and Tom both told me that they needed to check with their repair shop to make sure that they could do the work (why do they do this after they quote me? ) I followed up with Tom and Ed every day for 4 business days only to finally reach Tom when he asked, "When are you going to bring your car to Dorsey Transmission?" Without input from Tom or Ed, I had been in contact with Jack at Dorsey Transmission for those 4 days, and he, nor I, had ever been notified that I was to bring my car in.

Proposed settlements: Now I have a dilemma: At this point, I do not trust Guardian to leave me with a working car without a written assurance. Tom and Ed have never given me a written quotation and a validated price estimate to take to my mechanic beyond the $5000 vs. $3000 verbal statements. What is actually approved and why? And as a sub-point, how can Guardian get away with only paying $800 for the same transmission in the same car that cost $3,000 18 months ago? I am sick and tired of the Guardian service, and never want to make that phone call again, but Ed refused my offer to let him buy out my contract.

Proposed settlements: Option A) A written assurance that my car will be able to drive my car off the lot of Dorsey Transmission. If repairs were done, then for under $500 ($100 deductible + up to $400 in software costs more than double their estimation). If repairs were not done, or if they couldn't be completed, then for free. Option B) Instead of paying my mechanic $3,000 to fix my car, they pay me $3,000 personally to tear up their contract and never speak with them again. I will then handle my car in my own way.

The adjuster was extremely rude and had no intention of helping.