Complaint Review: Premier Warranty Group

I bought a used 4x4 suv with less than 60k miles from a Dodge dealer. The car came with a prepaid drive train warranty written by Premier. I don't know what kind of warranty, or what kind of riders were on the policy.

The transmission failed several months later. There was about a 10 day wait for the appraiser to come inspect the trans. They did approve the repair, and to my surprise I was happy to hear that they would not pay to have the trans repaired, but instead supplied a remanufactured unit. It took some time to get the trans in, wrapped  up on a crate, and then another week to get the car done. We lost the car for a month, but I was happy about remanufactured versus rebuilt and didn't mind the loss of the car considering the quality fix. We are having a problem with the transmission which we didn't notice for months and months, because our daughter has the car away at college. Trans fluid is spraying out from somewhere and drenching the bottom of the car with trans fluid which turns into smoke when it hits the exhaust. We thought we got it fixed. There is no pipe or hose leak, it is coming from somewhere on or in the trans. Despite being slowed down, it is still happening. I'm a little afraid of a fire, and am pursuing a fix. I have not contacted Premier, but did contact the repair shop to see if there was a warranty on the new trans. I did not get a response from the shop, and realize I should have contacted Premier myself. It may be too late. I will post an update.

I am happy with Premier's handling of the situation, but wonder who the remanufacturer was and why the trans, despite performing flawlessly, has this bothersome high pressure leak.

I too have a warranty with Premier Warranty Group and i also have a ford. I have personally been with the company for the past 3 years and have had 5 claims with the company. Out of the 5 claims that i have filed i have only had 1 claim denied, which was a oxygen sensor. I purchased all the riders the company had to offer including the Normal Wear and Tear.

You see i called the company before applying because on the application i recieved Normal Wear and Tear was mentioned. I was informed when i called that it was only $27.80 extra to add that rider.

I have had alot of transmission problems with my taurus and was told by the ford dealership that they are FAMOUS for their transmission problems. Premier Warranty Group was there to help me when i needed them. I believe it is the consumers responsiblity to read what they are getting themselves involved in before they sign up. Also to make sure they purchase the right protection they need for their vehicle.

When my daughter purchased her second used car, she did it on her own without any assitance from her parents. She financed through her bank, but then told me she had purchased this "used car warranty". I had heard negative things about these warranties and thought she might have been taken.

To date, the warranty company has replaced the engine and the transmission at very little out of pocket cost to my daughter. I was amazed and have decided if I ever buy a used vehicle, I want the same warranty company. For the record, her company is not the one listed in this initial complaint.

When my daughter purchased her second used car, she did it on her own without any assitance from her parents. She financed through her bank, but then told me she had purchased this "used car warranty". I had heard negative things about these warranties and thought she might have been taken.

To date, the warranty company has replaced the engine and the transmission at very little out of pocket cost to my daughter. I was amazed and have decided if I ever buy a used vehicle, I want the same warranty company. For the record, her company is not the one listed in this initial complaint.

When my daughter purchased her second used car, she did it on her own without any assitance from her parents. She financed through her bank, but then told me she had purchased this "used car warranty". I had heard negative things about these warranties and thought she might have been taken.

To date, the warranty company has replaced the engine and the transmission at very little out of pocket cost to my daughter. I was amazed and have decided if I ever buy a used vehicle, I want the same warranty company. For the record, her company is not the one listed in this initial complaint.

When my daughter purchased her second used car, she did it on her own without any assitance from her parents. She financed through her bank, but then told me she had purchased this "used car warranty". I had heard negative things about these warranties and thought she might have been taken.

To date, the warranty company has replaced the engine and the transmission at very little out of pocket cost to my daughter. I was amazed and have decided if I ever buy a used vehicle, I want the same warranty company. For the record, her company is not the one listed in this initial complaint.

"FYI: most/not all service contract claims that get turned down are a direct result of the service facility doing a poor job of explaining the breakdown when getting authorization for repair."

So we can add this to the list of why you have a slim to none chance of getting a claim paid even on something stated in most all extended service contracts "internally lubricated parts"

I would have to disagree with you David extended service contracts are a good buy and worth while product for every consumer. I do agree with you on one statement "many service contracts & companies" are not worth the paper they are printed on. There are many that are very good at what it is they do, just like any product the consumer needs to read what it is they are purchasing at the time of the sale or shortly there after.

FYI: most/not all service contract claims that get turned down are a direct result of the service facility doing a poor job of explaining the breakdown when getting authorization for repair.

It's obvious the are just trying to wiggle out of paying the claim. Using their version of a problem nothing would be covered ever. Like "Well the connecting rod did break and destroy the engine. Connecting rods get weak and break due to wear, this is normal wear and tear so this repair is not covered."

I'm glad people see these posts and responses so they will know how worthless most of these warranties are and how much crap you have to go through to get a claim paid. Regardless of what will be stated in the slick glossy booklet they give you at the dealership when they are trying to make the sale.

I have never read a Premier Warranty application/contract however I would guesstimate that it states "covered if damaged by an internally lubricated part" if it doesn't the failure is still a covered component. Are there any TSB's for this type of failure? This type of failure is not tired to maintenance requirements since the transmission is not required to be serviced until 100K miles.

There is still more information required to determine if the failure is a covered part but at this point I would say Premier should have the vehicle inspected by a different inspection company to be fair to both parities.

PS: Donald's or their claim department's interruption of a wear & tear breakdown definition is incorrect as he has stated it.

Oh please, "there were grooves in the stabilizer support and also the torque converter shaft had grooves wore in it also which it turn caused the problem in her transmission" I can just see the Ford engineers siting around saying "we will design these parts to groove at around 40,000 miles but it will be normal wear and tear". There are millions of Sables/Tauruses that have over 100,000 miles that haven't "grooved" their torque converter shafts.

The denial of the claim in question has nothing to do with the contractholder's age but the daughter complaining seems to think we are picking on her mother or taking advantage of her mother but the truth is, the claim was denied properly based on her contract provisions, her daughter Sharon is not telling all of the truth in her complaint and we will set the facts straight in this rebuttal.

The contractholder called in her claim for a transmission problem (she was not stranded in Georgia but was staying at her daughter-in-laws house, who also has called us about the claim)and based on the contract provisions, coverage is not provided for normal wear and tear to any item (unless you purchase the normal wear rider and in this case the contractholder did not opt to buy this even though it was offered to her three times over the two months she has had this contract).

Based on a recorded conversaton with the mechanic of her choice, he said based on wear, there were groves in the stabilizer support and also the torque converter shaft had grooves wore in it also which it turn caused the problem in her transmission. Since this was the cause of failure, then nothing is covered. This wear is caused by the normal use and wear of the vehicle over time.

Our company did not refuse to honor her warranty, we followed all provisions of her contract and her claim was properly denied. As we tried to explain to the daughter, the son and the daughter-in-law, when the mechanic said it is not "normal" for this on a vehicle with low miles, should not be confused with normal wear. It was never said it was not normal for this to happen. It was said it was caused by "NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR", and not to confuse it with the words "not normal"(meaning it usually doesn't happen - it's not normal for this to happen).

So, another mistatement by the daughter "that refusing to honor the warranty, we effectively screwed a 69 year old widow" was said to try and make us look bad whereas the daughter, Sharon of Tennessee is trying to untruthfully turn the tables on our company just because we honored the warranty of her mother and followed all provisions correctly.

We are sorry for Mrs. McCurry's misfortune but we are not the blame.