First Extended Service Corporation

I explained that the service manager stated that motor mounts are not part of the powertrain (which she originally agreed with). She began talking over me, and when I asked her not to talk over me, she began to yell at me. Then she hung up on me. This company has many complaints against it. When I checked on them at ConsumerAffairs.com I found that many people have experienced similar, if not worse problems with this company. I plan to call an attorney and a local consumer reporter so that no one else has to go through this. The service advisor is going to send a detailed report to them to explain how the motor mounts are not part of the powertrain. I will see what happens.

I have a phone call to the original car dealership where I purchased the vehicle to see if he can get anywhere with them and to hopefully stop selling their warranty. I actually paid $2,800 dollars to be treated in this manner! I looked up how much an extended warranty should cost and I paid way too much! Stay far away from this company! I am going to tell everyone I know who is thinking about buying a vehicle.

Between 9/14/19 and 11/11/19 car vision dealership and First Extended Corp failed to activate the contract making the customer unable to submit any claims. This was done with the purpose so that if the customer submits the claim it will be rejected because no prior authorization received. On 11/11/19 CarVision dealership acting on behalf of First Extended Corp admitted its wrongful act and activated the contract. It further admitted the reason why it chose to deal with first extended corp is because of the kickbacks it receives from them and that is the reason why the carvision dealership didn't offer any other warranty contracts to chose from.

On 11/13/19 a claim was submitted for the steering rack's failure requiring replacement by the Audi dealership in Mechanicsburg PA. On 11/13/19 First Extended Corp notified the customer that it will be willing to cover only 1350$ price of the 2200 for the steering rack. To which the customer explained, that direct interpretation of the contract states that the part "may be new or like condition."

Further, it is direct language of the contract that the replacement with the new part is a possibility. However, acting maliciously with intent to deprive the customer of his contractual benefit, the warranty company failed to honor the contract by choosing to proceed with the junkyard remanufactured replacement. Essentially it stated if your steering rack broke at 22k miles, we gonna get you another one that will serve another 22k miles so it will be of "the like quality"

On 11/16/19 after hearing a complaint from the customer, the warranty company acting in bad faith and with proven malicious intent with extensive screenshots and other evidence only covered the labor costs and refused to cover 1350$ that it previously agreed to after the customer complained about the fact that the new part replacement is directly written in the contract.

Evidence of malicious intent and bad faith:

- Warranty company failed to activate the contract leading the customer to the position that he paid for non-existent services between September and November 2019. This is proven and documented. The warranty company was receiving payments for the contract it had not activated. Selling non-existent service is illegal. It was non-existent because if the customer would have submitted a claim it would have been rejected because the record did not contain information about the customer because it was intentionally not activated.

- Warranty company failed to honor the requirement that whenever the contract states that exercise of the option whether to proceed with a new part or the used part as a replacement - it must act in good faith. The contract states "new part" or "like quality". It is proven that the warranty company never intended to replace it with the new part and it was only a marketing strategy to advertise replacement with "new" parts where in fact evidence shows it never intended to use those new parts.

- Warranty company falsely advertised that the new part replacement was ever a possibility and falsely advertised that possibility where in fact it never intended to replace with the new part, because after hearing the complaint from the customer on 11/15/19 it simply chose to cover only labor costs but not the part itself.

- After hearing the customer's complaint on 11/15/19 the warranty company retaliated against the customer by declining to cover the cost of the part, which it previously told the Audi dealership it will cover in the price of 1350. This is conclusive evidence of breach of contract and malicious business practices on the part of the warranty company.

- During the conversation the company's representative indicated that he has recognized that the customer is in a protected under the civil rights act category. This determination was made on the record and was also considered in deciding to retaliate against the customer because of his immediately audient accent and nation origin.

Given the conclusive evidence of the breach of contract, I am requesting that all of my damages are compensated and the First Extended Corp's license to practice business is temporarily suspended until the office of the Attorney General consumer affairs conducts a full range investigation into the fraudulent and malicious practices defrauding innocent and law abiding customers.

We have never touched them since we bought this unit. So I called back to see what was going on and the person on the phone for First Extended said that no one ever put the request in for approval. She said she would check on it and get back with me. Still waiting. Worse thing I ever did was purchase this stupid warranty. I was told by Bankston RV in Madison AL that it was a mandatory purchase in order to buy the RV. Sounds like a nice racket to me! Now that I see the reviews on this company, I feel sick to my stomach! How is this allowed to continue?

Susan

"Suspension System Concern. Concern? = The Rear axle has shifted 2in. to the rear. Check and Advise. Conditions? = ***After checking on the rear end we found that the pin that lines the axle up and holds it in place on the leaf spring has completely rusted in two. Letting the rear axle slide backwards, also the lowest leaf in the spring has fallen out at some point. The U-bolts at the rear leaf spring are also ruined due to the axle moving. In order to fix the issues we will need to replace at least the Right Rear Leaf Spring. It is possible that both rear springs will need to be replaced due to the truck having a lift kit. The hard part is knowing what size lift kit the truck has on it in order to order the correct springs. The truck is NOT drivable at this time due to the spring and rear axle issues." And First Extended Service Corporation only pays $55 per hour for labor which is also pathetic!!!!

I paid over 800 dollars to to have the transmission lines replaced. Truck only has 60,000 miles on it. It benefits both the dealership and the warranty company to say it's not covered. The warranty company isn't going to pay the rate they charged me to fix the problem. Then the dealership said it needed all this other work for another 1800 dollars. I had them do the lines and got it out of there as fast as possible. I think the dealerships are in cahoots with the warranty company. Would love to know if there are any class action suits out there.