- Report: #810875
Complaint Review: MEPCO - Chicago Illinois
Reported By:
sdfreespirit -
San Diego, California, United States of America
Submitted:
Updated:
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
MEPCO
River Center #375 Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
Phone:
Web:
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
MEPCO First Choice Warranty Corporation, MEPCO Premium Finance Company, Consumer Direct Warranty Services MEPCO Scum of the Earth, royal rip offs do not do business with these liars Chicago, Illinois
Below I will paste the demand letter I sent them. I was hustled big time. Stay away from these liars!
BEGIN LETTER
Please be advised that I am hereby rescinding my Vehicle Product Warranty through Consumer Direct Warranty Services (CDWS) as the agent for First Choice Warranty Corporation (FCWC) on the grounds of fraud in the inducement. Specifically, at the time I was solicited to purchase the warranty, the salesman made numerous false statements to me about the terms of the warranty, and further expressly represented to me that the warranty covered (among other things) the replacement of catalytic converters and CV joints.
Relying on his statements, I paid a deposit of $450.00 and another two payments of $142.92 for June and July. Today I took my vehicle in for repair, and an itemization of the repairs needed were submitted to your claims department. My claim for coverage for each and every single item needing repair was denied, leaving me with a repair bill of over $4000 that should have been covered by the warranty. According to your claims department:
The leak in the valve gasket is not covered because it is not an internal component of the engine that
requires lubrication for operation. Yet, in reading coverage for Seals & Gaskets, these are covered if they are seals for covered components. As the name implies, a valve cover is a cover for the valves. Valves are internal components of the engine that require lubrication, and are Covered Components. Thus, the valve cover seal is a failed seal of a Covered Component. Under CDWSs overly restrictive reading of the contract, a gasket or seal would never be covered since a gasket or seal, by itself, is not an internal component that requires lubrication for operation. Coverage is further narrowed by additional language excluding any incidental, consequential, or subsequent damage to any component of the vehicle, covered or not covered, making the warranty completely illusory. The placement of this exclusion in the Covered Components section instead of where it should be, e.g. the Exclusions section is particularly deceptive and misleading to the consumer.
My claim for replacement of the suppressor wires was denied on the grounds that it was not listed as a Covered Component under the Electrical definition. Yet, in reading what items are covered under Electrical, none of the electrical components would really be covered in light of FCWCs sweeping exclusion for electrical equipment, including, but not limited to . . . wiring or wiring harness . . . By removing coverage for electrical wiring, I cannot think of one component of any vehicle that would really be covered by the warranty. This is especially true since the claims representatives are given unlimited
authority to make it up as they go with the including, but not limited to exclusion verbiage deceptively placed on page 7, not on page 4 under Exclusions where the average consumer would expect to find it.
With respect to the catalytic converter, the salesman expressly stated to me that this was a covered component. The reason I remember this was because I already had to have one of the converters replaced, and given the mileage on my car at the time, I expected that I would need to replace the other one in the not too distant future.
Based on the above, I am placing FCWC and CDWS on notice under California Civil Code 1782 that they have 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter in which to refund me the entire amount of premiums paid or otherwise repair my vehicle as indicated in the claim. Failure to do so will expose you to liability for attorneys fees, civil penalties, punitive damages, and injunctive relief.
MEPCO is directed to immediately cease and desist all further contact with me under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as I dispute any amount owed to FCWC or CDWS and am not going to pay any further amounts.
BEGIN LETTER
Please be advised that I am hereby rescinding my Vehicle Product Warranty through Consumer Direct Warranty Services (CDWS) as the agent for First Choice Warranty Corporation (FCWC) on the grounds of fraud in the inducement. Specifically, at the time I was solicited to purchase the warranty, the salesman made numerous false statements to me about the terms of the warranty, and further expressly represented to me that the warranty covered (among other things) the replacement of catalytic converters and CV joints.
Relying on his statements, I paid a deposit of $450.00 and another two payments of $142.92 for June and July. Today I took my vehicle in for repair, and an itemization of the repairs needed were submitted to your claims department. My claim for coverage for each and every single item needing repair was denied, leaving me with a repair bill of over $4000 that should have been covered by the warranty. According to your claims department:
The leak in the valve gasket is not covered because it is not an internal component of the engine that
requires lubrication for operation. Yet, in reading coverage for Seals & Gaskets, these are covered if they are seals for covered components. As the name implies, a valve cover is a cover for the valves. Valves are internal components of the engine that require lubrication, and are Covered Components. Thus, the valve cover seal is a failed seal of a Covered Component. Under CDWSs overly restrictive reading of the contract, a gasket or seal would never be covered since a gasket or seal, by itself, is not an internal component that requires lubrication for operation. Coverage is further narrowed by additional language excluding any incidental, consequential, or subsequent damage to any component of the vehicle, covered or not covered, making the warranty completely illusory. The placement of this exclusion in the Covered Components section instead of where it should be, e.g. the Exclusions section is particularly deceptive and misleading to the consumer.
My claim for replacement of the suppressor wires was denied on the grounds that it was not listed as a Covered Component under the Electrical definition. Yet, in reading what items are covered under Electrical, none of the electrical components would really be covered in light of FCWCs sweeping exclusion for electrical equipment, including, but not limited to . . . wiring or wiring harness . . . By removing coverage for electrical wiring, I cannot think of one component of any vehicle that would really be covered by the warranty. This is especially true since the claims representatives are given unlimited
authority to make it up as they go with the including, but not limited to exclusion verbiage deceptively placed on page 7, not on page 4 under Exclusions where the average consumer would expect to find it.
With respect to the catalytic converter, the salesman expressly stated to me that this was a covered component. The reason I remember this was because I already had to have one of the converters replaced, and given the mileage on my car at the time, I expected that I would need to replace the other one in the not too distant future.
Based on the above, I am placing FCWC and CDWS on notice under California Civil Code 1782 that they have 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter in which to refund me the entire amount of premiums paid or otherwise repair my vehicle as indicated in the claim. Failure to do so will expose you to liability for attorneys fees, civil penalties, punitive damages, and injunctive relief.
MEPCO is directed to immediately cease and desist all further contact with me under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as I dispute any amount owed to FCWC or CDWS and am not going to pay any further amounts.
