he's been waiting for months and now you're giving him less than a day to claim what's rightfully his?? is that what you call "good faith"?
He thought paying Noah off would delete this thread, doesn't look like that will happen now which may change things as damage has been done and this bad PR will not go away. I certainly would not do any business with them. I'd request a cashiers check or immediately verify funds with the bank when you get the check in case it's a invisible worthless paper check, especially if in a line of customers that also want refunds or creating more legal problems and pressure before he goes Ch 7.
This is a perfect situation to use your handy Mastercard or Visa (not debit card or AMEX). MC/Visa have 2 year chargeback procedures and policies!! That is correct, for up to two years you can dispute a charge on your credit card if the processing merchant did not meet the requirements set forth in the contract. The merchant bank cards' legal department make the final decision as to the validity of the claim. If it is listed as being covered and not payed by EWC the bank card company will side with the customer. This is regardless of if they have an imprint, signature and CVV (security code) with AVS (address verification) on your credit card. Don't try this with AMEX, they will side with the merchant more often than not. I was sooo close to purchasing a warranty from EWC for one of my cars and their salsepeople hounded me for weeks afterwards to finalize the deal. Take a look at www.warrantygold.com. These guys were the standard for aftermarket warranties and left thousands of people holding the bag with no paid claims!! My gut was to not trust this guy or his british accent speaking girls as far as I could throw them.. DG
I think it will only be fair to members that when I post my story into a separate thread, moderators dont merge them. And members who do the search can see more than one FU by Mr. Evans.
Look, I'm willing to crush somebody that does me wrong, but we have a complaint by Noah, and an anecdotal from what, 1 other user, claiming Ben's company disallowed a claim? That does not, in my estimation, make him a fraud, but we've got people who have nothing to do with him or his company making accusatory statements, telling him to go **** himself, and threatening him. I think that's a little much. It may turn out that Ben is wrong here, and if he is, i'll be happy to pillory him along with the rest of you. But statements like "anybody who provides a refund must be guilty" are just not sensible, in my experience, both as a consumer and a lawyer. I respectfully ask everyone who is hungering for Ben's blood to take a deep breath and see if this can't be sorted out. I do think asking for positive or negative experiences of other customers is legitimate; i'm just asking those standing on the sidelines, with pitchforks and flaming torches, to stand down for a bit, til we get to the truth.
I had several long conversations with my credit card provider about this, and they INSISTED that their time limit was 6 months, and that there was absolutely nothing they could do to help me. Obviously if this isn't resolved with the check that should be arriving tomorrow, this is another avenue for me to pursue. How would one go about filing a claim within the 2-year guidelines if the CC company has its own limit of 6 months? --Noah
I was thinking the same thing regarding satsfied customers. Aftermarket Warranties are often crap shoots IMO. I am sure there are reputable Co.'s around but for every good company , how many bad ones are their? That is why I would only pay $$$$ for a certified manufacturer approved warranty even if if costs a lot of money. It would be interesting to hear how Ferrari's Powertrain Plus & Cube Service contract is and is it worth the money. I guess that could be for another thread.
Probably so, but Ben did himself no favors with his responses, essentially calling his customer (who is very reputable on this site and is friends with many others who are reputable) a liar in public while demanding that everything be swept under the digital rug as a condition of refunding the man's money.
All true but Ben's statement: "Many here are customers, many here love my company, and many here have had claims approved and paid." IMO if true should result in some verifiable affirmation. Standing by...
Agreed. In the interest of keeping this debate/discussion from turning into a lynchmob, I'm closing the thread temporarily. I've asked Noah to contact me (or Rob) tomorrow when he knows what is happening with the check, and the thread will reopen then.
Guys, As you can see this thread has been reopened. Please refrain from verbal assaults and don't jump to conclusions so that we can benefit from good posts. Otherwise, I am certain it will be closed again.
I don't see why it was closed in the first place. Threats should be dealt with individually rather than by closing a thread that is enticing them. Users should know better not to threaten other users.
Brian & Gary: California B & P Code section 17200 has a solution for this guy. Even under the current amendment, both of you qualify for status in such a suit. You've both got my number, anyone up for a little fun? I'm willing to donate a little time, a little effort to place him where he needs to be, are you up for it? Call me if that interests you. Art
I had temporarily closed it in order to keep it from becoming a lynching of Ben. I'm not choosing sides, but it seems that there's people here with no dog in the hunt that are madder than the thread starter! Eric convinced me to reopen the thread in case any of Ben's defenders wanted to post.
Westmfg1: you are correct as to the number of disallowed claims, but i did not regard all of them as indicating something was amiss, or that fraud was taking place, Frefan indicated that a minor claim was disallowed and would not use the company again; RifleDriver also indicated that he filed two claims, both involving a manifold, that were rejected, but did not suggest fraud, or improper conduct, perhaps some questions regarding the clarity of the contract inclusions/exclusions; 412fly has stated that he has an ongoing dispute and has claimed that Ben is mischaracterizing the outcome, and current status of those proceedings; I am not questioning the legitimacy of anybody's claim history with Ben's company, but unless every person who now comes out of the woodwork and says "yeah, I submitted a claim- it was disallowed" is taken as an indication of Ben's never making good, or of fraud, I still think it makes more sense to see what comes of these, rather than jumping to the conclusion that the guy is running a sham. And, i say this having bought a warranty from him. If it turns out that Ben is a crook, i'll be on him, don't you worry. I'm just concerned that one allegation, and one anedoctal, do not make a fraud, even if others have been denied claims and are now rethinking the merits. Let's be fair, OK?
Here's a letter I submitted to them after one of my claims was denied by certified mail...Oh let me also say their dispute resolution is a hoax and even if Noah had followed it, it would have returned nothing in substance. The letter was submitted a day after the claim was denied and yet they also dismissed my claim by saying I did not follow their dispute resolution system which Cheryl specifically told me it would've been a waste of my time and will cost me more money to hire Umpire to look into this claim. I have Z's my last name and vin numbers... I also asked them several times to refund me the premium while they claimed the premium was not refundable there is nothing in the contract to signify that. While I am prepared to take this to a more appropriate forum I am giving EWC every opportunity to make good on their claim. I have been advised By FTC if this goes to court the warrantor will be liable for not only to make the product whole but also reasonable court costs.
Agreed, but I think it better to deal with those on an individual basis, rather than close the thread.
