Business Profile

Auto Service Contract Companies

American Auto Shield, LLC

This business is NOT BBB Accredited.

Find BBB Accredited Businesses in Auto Service Contract Companies.

Complaints

This profile includes complaints for American Auto Shield, LLC's headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see

Customer Complaints Summary

972 total complaints in the last 3 years.
163 complaints closed in the last 12 months.

If you've experienced an issue

Submit a Complaint

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

Initial Complaint
Date:08/03/2022
Type:Service or Repair Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
My car was repaired on 12-15-2021. I filed a claim for reimbursement for the car repairs via American Auto Shield because I had an active car warranty policy (MRF *******) with them. The car repair cost was $2246.58 and I called this business on multiple occasions but kept getting the run around. I was told that they needed the mechanic to send an itemized list of charges. I spoke with the business (MJ is the rep) and he told me that he sent the requested documents to them. I notified AAS and they said they hadn't received it. I contacted MJ and asked if he could send me the documents. He did. I then contacted AAS and asked them where to send the documents requested. I was told to email it to ********************************************* I emailed it accordingly on July 20th and still have not heard back from this company. They have given me the run around for months. It looks like they have a not-so-good rating as well and I should have conducted my research before purchasing a policy through them. I told the wife to cancel the policy effective this month.
Business Response
Date: 08/05/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and AAS serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on May 28, 2021. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

The customer and the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** called AAS on April 4, 2022. The ** reported the vehicle had been towed to the ** and the customer complained that the vehicle would not start. The ** found the battery had failed and the rear body harness was damaged. The ** replaced the battery, cleared the diagnostic trouble codes (the "DTCs"), and test drove the vehicle. At that time,the customer confused the *** for this vehicle with a *************** Contract for another vehicle owned by the customer, and AAS explained that the *** for this vehicle had no coverage for the failures.

As the repairs had been performed without authorization, the claim was sent to a claims team lead for review. The claim was closed on June 14, 2022,because the ** failed to provide an estimate or any further information. The customer called AAS on July 20, 2022, for an update. The customer was advised that the ** still had not provided its estimate or documentation. The claim was subsequently denied on July 22,2022, because the failures were not covered by the ***.

The claim was reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic, who determined the claim had been adjudicated correctly and pursuant to the terms of the ***. The customer's *** does not have coverage for failures of the battery or the electrical harness. The harness failure was a result of the oversized tires installed by the customer. This modification was performed incorrectly, resulting in failures. The *** has no coverage for this. This has been explained to the customer on more than one occasion.

With that stated, AAS is willing to resolve this dispute amicably and offers to instruct the seller of the *** to cancel the *** and fully refund to the customer the payments made for the ***. This offer must be accepted within seven days of the filing of this response or the offer will be null and void. The customer should accept this offer by writing the **************** at *************************************** or by responding to the BBB.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/05/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ******** and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I would like for them to cancel the *** and fully refund the payments made to the ***.

Sincerely,

*******************
Initial Complaint
Date:08/03/2022
Type:Customer Service Issues
Status:
AnsweredMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
7/6 filed clam 8/3 car still in shop. Have a premium package. Terrible customer service. Will push back on every details of claim. This is a fraud, terrible service practice and should be stopped.
Business Response
Date: 08/05/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("***") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and *** serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on April 20, 2022. The *** had a wait period of twenty days and 500 miles or forty days and 250 miles. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is ***. (The customer previously owned a *************** Contract for another vehicle.)

The customer called *** on July 5, ************ there was something wrong with his vehicles transmission. He had pulled over to the side of the road,and *** advised him to have the vehicle towed to the nearest repair facility (and provided information regarding nearby facilities). The customer did not wish to do that because he was unable to pay the towing fee. *** advised the customer to provide details for the tow and *** would review for possible reimbursement. The customer still disagreed and stated he would let the vehicle cool for a few minutes and then drive it to a nearly repair facility. *** told the customer this could cause further damage to the vehicle and there would be no guaranty of coverage. The customer stated he would call back the next day.

The customer then called *** on July 12, ************ that after the call the previous week, he drove to the shop and the light was not illuminated but then came back on. The customer was advised to have his chosen repair facility call *** with its diagnosis and cause of failure.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called *** on July 29, 2022. The breakdown date was reported as July 22,2022, ninety-four days after purchase of the ***. The ** reported that the vehicle had been driven to the ** and the customer had several concerns: (1) The transmission temperature warning light was illuminated. The ** found a diagnostic trouble code (a "DTC") P0712 (transmission fluid temperature sensor circuit low input) and found the fluid in fair condition. (2) There appeared to be an oil leak in the engine. The **, after a visual inspection, found oil leaking from the timing chain cover. (3) There was a noise coming from the front end. The ** found, after a road test,that the front strut mounts were making a noise. (4) The blower motor was not working on high. The ** found there was no input from the resistor.

A review of the information provided indicated a high average of miles driven per day (291). As this was above the normal daily average, the claim was sent to the Client ******************** for review. Further, the vehicle was early into coverage and the failure could have been pre-existing. *** asked the customer to provide service records to clarify the issue. The customer stated he performed his own oil changes, and *** asked him to provide any receipts, records, and a maintenance log.

The customer provided a maintenance log which contained mileage and dates but did not provide any receipts or records. The customer was advised that although it did help to explain the high mileage, the maintenance log was not verifiable and *** needed copies of service and maintenance records (Section E. of the ***).

The seller of the *** called Client Relations on August 3, 2022 and stated that the customer on a somewhat regular basis drove over 600 miles for his work. Client Relations determined the claim could proceed.

The customer submitted a complaint with the **********************, and the claim was reviewed by the *** legal department. After pulling a CarFax report and comparing that report with the customer's maintenance log, it was determined the claim could not proceed without verifiable records.

The claim reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for ***, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic (the "Specialist"). The issue with this claim is the very high miles per day since the *** start with multiple failures. There is also clear continued operation based on the customer's statement when he initially called in with the transmission issue. Records were requested and sent in. The customer also provided a typed log detailing the customer's performance of his own maintenance. No verifiable receipts were provided.

The Specialist pulled a CarFax report for the claim, and it does not line up with the customer's maintenance records at all. The customer's oil changes were apparently performed on the 30th of every month. The first record from the customer stated LOF on 1/30/2022 at mileage of ****** miles. The next record is 2/30/2022 at ******. That was followed by a record dated 3/30/2022 with mileage of ******. The last two entries on the CarFax report show mileage of ****** on 9/29/2021 and mileage of ****** on 11/15/2021. This shows the records provided by the customer are not accurate.

As the only records provided are shown to not be accurate according to the CarFax report and without having anything to actually verify the records, *** is unable to move this claim forward. Without an approved claim, there is no rental coverage from the *** (Section C.2.).

With respect to the customer's previous contract ************, there was an approved and paid claim for an A/C compressor from last year. This was authorized pursuant to the terms of the ***. There are no notes about any recent calls regarding this contract.

Nonetheless, *** is willing to resolve this dispute amicably and offers to instruct the seller of the *** to cancel both ***s and fully refund to the customer the payments made for both contracts less claims paid. This offer must be accepted within seven days of the filing of this response or the offer will be null and void. The customer should accept this offer by writing the **************** at *************************************** or by responding to the BBB.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.
Initial Complaint
Date:08/03/2022
Type:Delivery Issues
Status:
AnsweredMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
Please see the attached document with more information and details regarding my problem Thank you!*On July 30, 2021, ******* denied a claim to repair my Jeep. The final repair bill which I paid to repair my warrantied vehicle was $5,940. My contract deductible per incident is $100, so I am seeking to be reimbursed by ******* $5,840, should the Better Business Bureau find in my favor during this complaint process. *March 23, 2021, I purchased from CARCHEX Contract Number: ABC047567 to cover my Jeep Patriot Latitude X VIN: *****************.I paid $2,457 to CARCHEX for this warranty contract ABC047567. ** (Document Attached-CARCHEX Warranty info)*June 28, 2021, ******************** submitted a claim for a transmission issue my Jeep suffered, after my warranty's wait period. However CARCHEX works with American Auto Shield who has refused to honor my warranty, and has also stated my claim issue is not considered preexisting due to it happening, in their opinion, during the breakdown period.
Business Response
Date: 08/09/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and *** serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a term *** on March 23, 2021. The *** had a wait period of thirty (30) days and ***** miles or ninety (90) days and 500 miles. The customer reported mileage of ******. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

The first claim was opened by the customer's first chosen repair facility (the "********") when it called AAS on June 28, 2021. The ** reported the vehicle had been towed to the ********, and the customer complained that the vehicle was not shifting. The ******** drained the transmission fluid and found metal and reported the clutches had failed. The ******** reported the mileage was ****** and the breakdown date was June 4, 2021, seventy-four days after purchase of the ***. The ******** reported there were seventeen diagnostic trouble codes ("DTCs"). The ******** cleared and reset all the DTCs. The ******** was then unable to provide the DTCs as the battery was dead. AAS advised the ******** it would have to obtain the customer's authorization for RDI (remove, disassemble, and inspect - a tear down) and that AAS would need to review the DTCs, a pressure test, and freeze frame data.

The customer provided her statement of the issue on June 30, 2021. She reported the vehicle would not go over 15 MPH and the dashboard lights were illuminated; the issue began on June 4, 2021. She had the vehicle towed to the ********. AAS asked the customer to provide copies of service and maintenance records for the past twelve months. The customer provided records, and one of those records was dated April 7, 2021, with mileage of ****** miles. The customer also provided her authorization for RDI.

AAS made multiple attempts to reach the ********, and the claim became inactive on July 14, 2021, due to lack of communication on the part of the ********. The ******** called AAS on July 16, 2021, to reopen the claim. The ******** submitted several DTCs on July 22, 2021, but no freeze frame data. All DTCs were related to electrical component failures, and no RDI had been completed.

The fully assembled vehicle was inspected by an independent, third-party inspection service on July 27, 2021. On a test drive, the vehicle had a shudder under load and had a high RPM shift. The ******** demonstrated several DTCs. The ** dropped the transmission pan, as requested, and the fluid contained metal debris; there was a heavy buildup on the magnet as well. The inspector's findings were consistent with an internal CVT failure, but the cause of the failure was not determined.

The claim was denied on July 29, 2021. The ******** had originally provided an incorrect mileage for the date of the breakdown. The mileage at the time of the breakdown was actually ****** miles, which meant the vehicle had traveled 535 miles in seventy-four days, placing the failure in the wait period. The customer is referred to Section *****. of the ***.

The customer then had the vehicle towed to the second repair facility (the "second **"), and a second claim was opened on October 26, 2021, also for transmission issues. The DTCs were the same as those found by the ********. The second ** reported the breakdown milage as ****** miles, twenty-seven miles more than reported in the first claim. No records were provided to indicate the repair had been performed, and the issue in the second claim was the same as the issue in the first claim. The claim was denied on December 16, 2021, due to continued operation.

The customer and the second ** attempted to reverse the denial, stating the failure was an instant failure. AAS determined this was not an instant failure due to the amount of fine metal debris in the transmission and due to the customer's having driven an additional twenty-seven miles after leaving the ********. The customer now seeks to have those denials reversed.

The claims were reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic, who determined the claims had been adjudicated correctly and pursuant to the terms of the ***. Based on the claim notes, dates,and recorded mileages, the initial failure occurred during the wait period of the ***, pursuant to *** Section D.1.q. The initial failure was recorded on day 74 with a reported 535 elapsed miles. The second claim was denied as the failures were identical to those in the first claim and no proof of repair had been provided.

Based on records supplied and the CarFax report, the customer incorrectly reported the *** inception mileage at the time of sale on March 23, 2021 as ****** miles. Records indicate the vehicle had the exact,same mileage while located at an ** on April 7, 2021.

The claim was adjudicated correctly, and the *** has no coverage. There is nothing AAS can offer at this time.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/15/2022

Complaint: 17665666

I am rejecting this response because:
Thank you to the Better Business Bureau for processing this complaint and allowing me to also respond to American Auto Shields response to the complaint I filed against them regarding the claim they denied on July 30, 2021.
American Auto Shield (***) did not sell my vehicle service contract (***). As stated in my complaint, my contract was purchased from CarChex on March 23, 2021. Also stated in my complaint is that *** does administration for claims against CarChex Vehicle Warranty Contracts. The CarChex *** which I purchased on March 23, 2021, states that the contract I purchased has a waiting period of 30 days &500 miles. 30 days from March 23, 2021, was April 22, 2021, and 500 miles over ****** was ****** miles. ********** as I have explained many times to *** representatives, as well as in my complaint, my vehicle had met the waiting period stated by my *** for the claim regarding my vehicles initial failure on June 4, 2021, which I then was told by phone on July 30, 2021 was denied due to my vehicle having been in the waiting period at the time of the initial failure.The proof of my ***s from CarChex waiting period was submitted with my complaint.

At no time did I request a refund of my ***. As stated in my complaint, *** representative regularly offered to refund my contracts in order to resolve the claim. More than once I declined refund and cancellation offers from *** representatives.Each time I reminded the *** representative that that my *** does not state anything about cancelling the *** and being sent a refund of the contract price to resolve a claim. I reminded each representative that the contract states I can only get a refund during first 30 days after Id purchased the contract, should I have wanted to change my mind and cancel the *** at that time.
As Id mentioned in my complaint a representative from *** phoned me June 30, 2021, to discuss the claim submitted by the first repair facility (first **). The *** representative asked me for 12 months of service and maintenance records. I then let the *** representative know that I had just purchased my vehicle in March 2021. The *** representative then changed his request and stated I should send service and maintenance from the time Id purchased my vehicle until present. I informed the *** representative of the two service and maintenance records I had, to date; an inspection done by the first ** on April 7, 2021, as well as a maintenance and service record for work performed by the first ** April 8, 2021.I also let the *** representative know that I faced a delay in registering my vehicle due to the local department of motor vehicles having temporarily closed, for an indefinite period of time, due to a COVID-19 outbreak. This left me with the choice of leaving the vehicle at the place of purchase, for an indefinite period of time, or moving my vehicle with a flatbed tow truck. I shared with the *** representative that I chose to hire a flatbed tow truck to transport my vehicle from the place of purchase to a local repair facility, which happened to also be the first **, and left it there until the local department of motor vehicles was able to process and mail me my vehicle registration. The *** representative stated I should also include this flatbed tow record with the other records to be submitted. I submitted the requested records via email to the *** representative.
The mileage on my vehicle did not change from the time of purchasing my *** until after my vehicle was registered. At the time of sale (when my *** was sold to me) the mileage on my vehicle was ****** miles. ******* my vehicle was not driven to a local repair facility, but instead moved with a flatbed tow truck, my vehicles mileage of ****** stayed the same. ******* the vehicle then sat in the parking lot of the first ** and was not driven the mileage did not change. ** April 7, 2021,the local ** moved my vehicle from their parking lot into their ** to inspect it. It is a short distance from the parking lot outside of the ** to the bay inside of ** that the vehicles mileage did not change, it remained ****** miles. ** August 8, 2021, local ** performed service and maintenance on my vehicle and then parked my vehicle back outside in their parking lot. This short move from inside the ** to the parking lot outside the ** still was not enough distance to cause the odometer to change, thus the mileage on the vehicle remained ****** through April 8, 2021. I then received the registration for my vehicle from the local department of motor vehicles,allowing me to drive my vehicle, thus causing the vehicles mileage to increase thereafter.
During the phone conversation with the *** representative, on June 30, 2021, regarding the claim made by the first ** on June 28, 2021, the *** representative stated that they needed an independent inspector to perform a RDI (remove, disassemble, and inspect-a tear down) of my transmission to approve this claim. I authorized this to be done. However, the independent inspector did not perform the **** as stated by ***, the independent inspector only inspected the vehicle while fully assembled, except for dropping the transmission pan and looking at the fluid, finding some metal debris, and test driving the vehicle, in which the inspector found a shudder. The claim made was to repair my vehicles transmission problems, which is a Jeep CVT transmission. *** states that the independent inspectors findings are consistent with an internal CVT failure but that the independent inspector did not find the exact cause but agreed that my CVT transmission failed.
At no time did *** contact me about any problems with obtaining information from the first **. *** did contact me to let me know the first ** had, at first, misread the mileage on my vehicle, but this was quickly corrected, and the mileage was accurately reported to be ****** the day my vehicle had its failure, and I verified this and *** and the *** representative said that this error was not a problem. The first ** did contact me during the claim process stating they had problems contacting *** because *** was calling before business hours, so instead of talking they were leaving messaged prior to business hours. When the first ** attempted to call back the *** representatives the first ** encountered long hold times, followed by being transferred, and more than once they could not get through to whoever had called to work on the claim. However, once the first ** was able to speak with an *** representative they were able to find out what *** would like reported and do so. I was at the first ** during one of the calls and watched a first ** perform some of the tests on my vehicle, which they subsequently emailed. I am unaware of any battery problems with my vehicle which *** discusses. I have not experienced any battery issues with my vehicle and no battery issues were reported to me by either the first ** or second ** or ***.

  July 30, 2021, I received a call from another *** representative who told me that my claim from June 28, 2021, was denied because my vehicles initial failure happened during the *** waiting period. The *** representative stated that the waiting period was 30 days and ***** miles or 90 days and 500 miles so my vehicle was in its waiting period when the June 4, 2021, failure occurred. I let the *** representative know that this was not the waiting period which my *** stated, and the representative told me I was wrong. I then asked the *** representative if there was any other reason which could have contributed to why my claim was denied. The *** representative confirmed for me that the only reason this claim was being denied was because the failure reported in the claim happened before the vehicle had met the waiting period requirements.

After receiving the July 30, 2021, phone call from the *** representative informing me that my claim was denied I called the CarChex salesperson whom I purchased my warranty from,in order to confirm what is the correct waiting period in the *** I purchased for my vehicle. He verified that the waiting period on my contract is 30 days and ******************************************************************************** overturning this denial because the reason given as to why my claim was denied was incorrect according to my contract.   This representative said he was able to verify that the waiting period stated in my *** was actually the 30 days and 500 miles so he would work on reversing it.
Over the next weeks I spoke with different representatives who confirmed my vehicle had met the waiting period. The representatives then told me that I needed to prove that my vehicle had an instant failure. During the phone conversations with the *** representative that I spoke with they made some suggestions to have my claims denial overturned and resolve it. **e suggestion was that I move the vehicle to another garage, have the transmission torn down, and if there is evidence of an instant failure contact *** so they could have my claim denial overturned, and send out an independent inspector to confirm my vehicle had an instant failure. The representatives did warn me that I would have to pay for having the transmission torn apart in if I wished *** to continue working on having my claim overturned. Another way to resolve my claim denial, I was told by the *** representative, was to just cancel my *** and get a refund. I was told that if I did this, I could then pay for the repairs needed to my vehicle. Each time this was suggested I let the *** representative know that I did not wish to cancel my *** , and let them know that my choice would be to move my vehicle to the second repair facility (second **) and have the transmission torn down, and if the second ** found an instant failure Id do as they had said, contact them to continue working on overturning the July 30, 2021 claim denial.
I followed through with the *** suggestion that I move my vehicle to another repair facility. I gave to the second repair facility (second **) the details of what had transpired regarding my vehicle between myself, *** and the ******** regarding the claim and subsequent claim denial. The second ** was also given the claim number and all my vehicles contract information and contact information for ***. My vehicle was transported to the second ** with a flatbed tow truck, and it did arrive with ****** miles on the odometer. This tow record I provided to ***, via email,on December 16, 2021.The second ** tore down the transmission and reported to me their finding, stating that the reason my transmission failed was due to an instant failure.
October 21, 2021,the second ** contacted *** regarding my original claim and gave the information to the *** representative, following the instructions Id told him to do, as I had them explained to me by previous *** representatives. The second ** shared all the information about my vehicle, his findings, and the original claim number. The *** representative he spoke with stated that they needed to create and assign new claim number in order to continue this claim and did so.The second ** reported to me that *** would get back to him, but the second ** did not hear back from ***.
October 27, 2021,because the second ** had not heard from *** I called *** and spoke with another representative at ***. He asked for more information to be emailed from the second ** to them, before an independent inspector could be sent to look at the torn down transmission. I asked why a new claim number was assigned an this *** representative stated this is normal procedure to continue a claim after a denial. This *** representative stated hed get back to me and the second ** as soon as he received the information hed requested. November 1, 2021, the information requested by this *** representative was emailed to them from the second **.
November 19,2021, the second ** and I had not heard back from the last *** representative whom I had spoken with, so I called the *** representative on November 19, 2021. The *** representative stated that he had not taken any action, yet, because he had lost the emails that the second ** and I had sent to him. The representative apologized, stated that he could not find our emails as we put the contract number in the subject line. However,while we were on the phone the *** representative did find the emails. He reviewed them and said hed contact the claims office to have the first claim denial overturned so that an independent inspector could be sent look at the torn apart transmission. This *** representative stated hed call me back in a few hours to update me, he then said he would definitely call me later that day, and then stated hed call me back within 24 hours. To date I have never received this follow-up call from this *** representative. After waiting 24 hours I did attempt to contact this *** representative for an update, both by phone and email, but never heard from this *** representative again.
** November 24, 2021, when trying to call the last *** representative I was transferred to another *** representative. After discussing the situation, regarding my months of attempt trying to have my vehicle repaired, the *** representative reviewed the records. Then, this *** representative stated that the last *** representative had taken no action. This representative then suggested I cancel my vehicle warranty contract and take the refund. I told this *** representative I was not interested in this suggestion. Then, this *** representative told me that there was missing paperwork from a recent servicevisit at a Jeep dealership, April 14, 2021. I told this *** representative that I had purchased a second key for my vehicle. I apologize for not submitting the receipt for the key as I didnt realize that purchasing a new key was a service and maintenance record. Immediately I emailed this record to the representative. This record also includes a complimentary Quality Check done by the dealership which showed that my vehicle had no other issues on April 14, 2021. This record was also submitted with my complaint.
This same representative, during our November 24, 2021, conversation, stated that the actual reason my vehicles claim was denied was because the vehicle was flashedOctober of 2020. The *** representative stated that the only reason a vehicle would be flashed would be to correct a transmission record, thus my June 4, 2021, failure. The *** representative then explained that because my vehicles June 4, 2021, failure was due to problems which caused the October 2020 flashing, and therefore my claim was denied and he continued, informing me further, that this flashing record is why I cant have the July 30, 2021 denial reversed. **ce the *** representative gave me an opportunity to respond I let him know that Id contacted **** in August 2021,found out if and where I could get old records on my vehicle (pre-dating my purchasing my vehicle), and then ordered what records I could from the dealership on August 31, 2021, receiving them in early September 2021. I informed this *** representative that the actual reason my vehicle was flashed was because there was a recall on the catalytic converter and the correction required replacing the catalytic converter followed by flashing the vehicle to complete the work needed for the catalytic converter recall. This *** representative stated that because the October 30, 2020, flashing was the actual reason for my July 30, 2020 claim denial that if I send him these records he can get the denial reversed, and get the independent inspector out to the second **. This *** representative said he would contact me with an update no later than Monday November 29, 2021. Immediately I sent the requested information in an email, as directed to this *** representative. Monday November 29, 2021, the last *** representative I spoke to did not contact me.
Novemeber30,2021 I received an email from the last *** representative I had spoken with,but this email was regarding another customer, and it included personal information as well as the other customers credit card number. I was able to reach the *** representative who sent me this email by mistake, by phone on November 30, 2021. When I informed him of the email I which I received in error, an email which included sensitive information about another customer, including their credit card number, the *** representative stated he was aware of this error, he had since contacted the customer and he was not concerned about this error.
Next, during this call on November 30, ************* asked this *** representative about how things were progressing regarding my claim,since our last phone conversation and the submission of the additional requested paperwork. He asked if he could put me on hold for a minute, and I said yes. Thirty minutes later the *** representative came back on the line. He informed me that my car did not have an instant failure because I could not have an instant failure 35 miles after completing the waiting period. Then, this *** representative asked me for more information and details as to why my vehicles transmission failure was an instant failure. The *** representative agreed to speak with the second **, so we added the representative at the second ** to our call, and continued, having a three-way call. In response to the *** representatives questions the second ** representative explained in detail what had happened in my transmission, causing the instant failure. The representative from *** then stated that an independent inspector could not be sent out until more pictures were taken and sent to ***, as well as a new invoice with a better explanation of what caused the instant failure in my transmission. The representative stated that, after receiving the requested information from the second ** he would contact me withing two days to give me a report on progress with my claim.
December 14,2021, the second ** submitted, via email, the requested information to *** via email. I called the *** representative we last spoke with on December 16, 2021,and he stated that hes in receipt of the requested information and that he would contact me the next day. This *** representative never did contact me on December 17, 2021.
December 23,2021, I received a call from another representative at ***. He stated my claim is denied because my *** does not allow a vehicle which has completed its waiting period to have a failure at 35 miles past the waiting period miles. He also stated my claim was denied, because the *** representative stated that I drove my vehicle to the second ** and thats why the second ** reported ****** miles on my vehicle when it arrived. This *** phone representative did not understand that the independent inspector had taken the vehicle for, what the ******** stated was a lengthy test drive. This phone representative would not look at the flatbed tow record I had submitted via email on December 16, 2021, to an *** representative when it was requested. This phone representative told me my claim is denied, going on to state that claims are never overturned. However, had *** contacted ******* and clarified that my warranty waiting period is stated at 500 miles and ********************************************************************************** July of 2021.
December 23,2021, after speaking to the *** representative who stated my claim is denied I called the prior representative whom Id spoken with. During our conversation I let him know about the call Id received from another *** representative,earlier in the day. First, this *** representative stated we have to go to arbitration. The next comment he made is that, instead, I can cancel my warranty (***) and take a refund and then go fix my transmission. At this time the call suddenly disconnected.
When I called back to *** it was another *** representative I spoke with. This representative informed me that I had better get an attorney because we had to go to court through Better Business Bureau arbitration. I argued that I dont think this is how it works, but he assured me I needed an attorney.

I do not believe my claim was adjudicated correctly. *** had ample time and opportunity to verify the waiting period on my *** which was purchased from CarChex. Without doing so my vehicles claim was denied, wrongly. Then, multiple representatives at *** whom I had discussions with lead me to believe that if I simply provided whatever documentation and proof which they requested each time we spoke, theyd re-process my claim and my claim could be overturned. Eventually it was an *** representative who stated if my vehicles transmission was torn apart and the second ** could prove an instant failure, theyd send an independent inspector to verify the mechanics report. Yet, no independent inspector arrived at the second **. *** representatives simply asked for more documents, and upon receiving them came up with yet another, new reason, as to why my claim was being denied, and this would require more proof, and more documents. After I was notified by phone of the initial claim denial, I was led to believe, many times, that overturning my denial was possible, so long as I cooperated, as I did for over 4 months after my claim was denied, from July 30, 2021, the *** representative led me along, until December 2021, to no avail.

I have am asking to be reimbursed the final cost of my vehicles repairs, less the $100 deductible which is stated in my CarChex *** because American Auto Shield failed to verify the waiting period specified on the contract they were administering,which was sold by CarChex. The waiting period was the initial reason my claim was denied and, in American Auto Shields reply they still are stating they did not approve my claim based on the waiting period. I made every effort possible, in good faith, to meet the many requests made, by ***, for further proof and documentation that *** stated they needed to overturn my claim denial. Thus, all the other requests for documentation and paperwork and proof and the ability to view my vehicle's transmission torn down at the second ** all seemed to be in vain, because American Auto Shield never verified that my *** states my waiting period is 500 miles and 30 days. The final repair costs were submitted to the Better Business Bureau along with my complaint.

Sincerely,

***************************
Business Response
Date: 08/23/2022
The claims were reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic (the "Specialist"). The Specialist also reviewed the rejection provided by the customer.

The customer's *************** Contract (the ****** was clearly still in the mandatory waiting period when the claimed failure occurred. The *** wait period is either: 1) 30 days AND ***** miles; or 2) 90 days AND 200 miles. The initial failure was recorded on day 74 with a reported 535 elapsed miles since *** purchase. At that point, the vehicle had to have traveled at least ***** miles to be outside the wait period based on miles. For the alternate wait period,the customer had traveled 535 miles but the wait period by days had not elapsed 90 days. Based on the claim notes,dates, and recorded mileages, the initial failure occurred during the wait period of the ***, and is therefore excluded from coverage pursuant to *** Section D.1.q. The second claim was denied as the failures were identical to those in the first claim and no proof of repair had been provided.

The claim has been reviewed by AAS several times, including all communications with the customer. *** did not find evidence that misinformation was provided to the customer at any point in the claim process. Based on all available documentation and records, the claim was adjudicated correctly, and AAS stands on its denial decision. There is nothing further that can be offered at this time.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 09/05/2022
Complaint: 17665666

I am rejecting this response because:
American Auto Shield (***) stated, in their response on August 9, 2022, that the reason they denied the claim to repair my vehicle is that my vehicle service contract (***) has a wait period of either: 1) 30 days and ***** miles; or 2) 90 days and 500 miles. *** stated, in their response on August 23, 2022, that the reason they denied the claim to repair my vehicle is that my *** had not met the *** wait period. However, in the August 23, 2022, *** response they stated my *** wait period is different that the wait period they stated in their August 9, 2022, response. *** now states that my *** has a wait period of either: 1) 30 days and ***** miles; or 2) 90 days and 200 miles. This is typical of the inconsistence I have experienced while dealing with ***.

  It is clearly written in my *** that my *** wait period is: 30 days and 500 miles. I will attach a second copy of this, with this response. I purchased my *** on March 23, 2021, and my vehicle failure happened 73 days later on June 4, 2021, surpassing the 30 day wait period written in my ***.   The mileage on my vehicle when I purchased my *** was ******. On June 4, 2021, when my vehicle had its reported failure, the mileage was reported to be ******. The mileage waiting requirement of *********************** my ***, were met and exceeded by 35 miles. My vehicle met the *** waiting period for both the waiting days and waiting miles, as stated in my *** contract.

I do not know why *** changed my claim number, all I know is that the *** phone representative I spoke with told me that to continue processing my initial claim they (***) needed to use a different claim number. The representatives I spoke to after the claim number was changed could offer me no explanation as to why my claim was assigned a new number but assured me they had all the information submitted from the initial claim number and they would continue processing my initial claim using the new claim number.

I am rejecting this response by *** because it is written in my *** that my vehicles wait period is 30 days and 500 miles. This means the failure my vehicle experience happened after the vehicle wait period had been met. *** phone representatives have misled me. They led me to believe if I submitted all the documentation needed, moved my vehicle to a second repair shop, then have the shop tear down my transmission, have it out of the vehicle and the problem evident for an independent inspector, one would be sent. Instead,December 2021, an *** representative called me and told me that my claim is denied and would not be overturned because your vehicle was in the wait period when the failure in the claim happened.

I have again attached my *** contract information which clarifies my *** wait period. Previously, with this complaint, I have also attached further supporting documentation regarding the various matters discussed in the complaint.

The reasons I have stated in my claim and my responses are the reason why I am asking for *** to reimburse me $5,840 which is my repair cost of $5,940 less the $100 per claim deductible as stated in my ***, to resolve this matter.

Please do not hesitate to contact myself if you have questions.
Sincerely,

***************************
Business Response
Date: 09/13/2022
The Declaration Page of the customer's *************** Contract (the "***")(which was not provided by the customer) clearly stated the waiting period was 30 days and ***** miles or 90 days and 200 miles. The customer provided a copy of the purchase summary, which stated the waiting period was 30 days and 500 miles. AAS asked the seller of the *** to provide the recorded sales call to clarify the discrepancy between what the customer states is the waiting period and what the Declarations Page of the *** states is the waiting period. The seller provided the sales call, and the seller's representative clearly offered the customer a *** which provided a wait period of 30 days and 500 miles. The representative stated this offer was not extended to all consumers but the customers vehicle qualified for the special offer. *** has asked the seller to address the discrepancy between the wait period actually provided and what is stated on the Declarations Page of the ***.

The claim was reviewed by the Legal Claims Director for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic. As described in AASprevious responses, there are still mileage discrepancy issues in this claim outside of the waiting period issue described above. Various mileage on the vehicle has been reported during the claim (by the repair facility, by the inspection company, and on service records provided); thus based on available evidence, the true mileage at the time of purchase of the *** cannot be determined.

At this time, AAS requests that the customer provide the final, paid invoice for review and reimbursement in accordance with the terms of the ***. That invoice should be provided to the ************************ at *************************************** within the next seven days.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 09/27/2022
Please see attached
Business Response
Date: 10/06/2022
American Auto Shield ("AAS") received the requested documentation from the customer. A Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS (the "Specialist") has attempted to reach the customer on numerous occasions to discuss the invoice and what the *************** Contract (the ****** would cover. The calls have gone directly to the customer's voice mail, and these calls have not been returned by the customer. If the customer would return the call from the Specialist, AAS could proceed with the proper adjudication of the claim. AAS cannot resolve this dispute without cooperation from the customer.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.
Customer Answer
Date: 10/21/2022

Complaint: 17665666

I am rejecting this response because:
In the complaint response sent to me on 10/11/22 from American Auto Shield (***,) through the Better Business Bureau (BBB), The *** legal affairs representative states: A Senior Legal Claims Specialist for *** (the "Specialist") has attempted to reach the customer on numerous occasions to discuss the invoice and what the *************** Contract (the ****** would cover. The calls have gone directly to the customer's voice mail, and these calls have not been returned by the customer.

From the day I filed this complaint with the BBB, until today, I have received one phone call from an *** representative, and that was on 9/26/22. My phone has caller ID so had any more calls been made to me from ***, even if no voicemail was left, my phone would have recorded the call(s). The one call I received from the *** representative, 9/26/22, did go to my voicemail due to the fact I was not able to answer my phone when the call came in. However, This is why I have voicemail set up on my phone, to allow incoming callers to leave message when I can not answer. The *** representative who called me on 9/26/22 did leave a voicemail in which he stated:

Hi, this message is for (Customer Name). (Customer Name) when you have a moment if you would please give me a call back. My name is (*** Representatives Name) with American Auto Shield (*** phone number stated) and my direct extension is (direct extension stated). Thank you.

I absolutely do not owe *** any explanation as to why I could not answer the phone when they called, or why I could not immediately return their call, but I will explain. I have been dealing with a serious family crisis which needed my full attention. Due to my family crisis the first moment in which I could return the *** representatives call was 10/19/2022. I called the number specified by the *** representative in his voicemail to me/ When the call was answered electronically,I dialed his personal extension, as he requested in his voicemail. The *** representative did not answer the phone, however I was able to leave a voicemail at his direct extension, which I did. In my voicemail message I stating my name, my phone number, and my vehicle service contract number. At the time I submitted this response through the BBB complaint system the *** representative has not returned the call I made to him.

*** has verified that they were mistaken when denying my claim. *** has received the final paid invoice for my vehicles repairs. *** can proceed with proper adjudication of this claim by reversing the mistaken denial decision, authorizing payment to me in the sum of $5,840.00 (paid invoice: $5,940.00 copay: $100 per claim = Reimbursement:$5,840.00), and also *** seeing to it I receive this payment. This will adequately address the issues raised in the complaint.

Sincerely,

***************************
Business Response
Date: 10/27/2022
A Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS (the "Specialist") spoke with the customer on October 27, 2022, and an agreement was reached. This agreement is confidential and should not be discussed in a public forum, such as the BBB. AAS will work with the customer independently to finalize that settlement and reimburse the customer. As such, *** considers the complaint resolved.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.
Initial Complaint
Date:08/03/2022
Type:Order Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
This is in reference to claim #*******, **** Hummer H2 Beginning in March, 2021, I contracted with American Autoshield for their warranty service to cover major breakdowns like engine, transmission, etc. I have paid $129.99 every month, then on June 10th, 2022, the transmission totally stopped working. I had to have AAA tow my vehicle to AAmco in *****************. On Tuesday, June 14th, AAmco contacted American Autoshield to advise them of the transmission failing and that they had the car. I called American Autoshield on Monday, June 20 and was advised by a service person that they received the estimate from AAmco and that an inspector would be out within 48 hours. I called again on June 23, they said they needed 24 more hours. I called again on Friday, June 24 and spoke with *****, then Hannah * still no adjuster. I called on Monday June 27, spoke to **** who indicated she would follow up. I also spoke to *****, the owner of AAmco who said the transmission is still out, but no inspector has come to look at it. On Tuesday, June 28 I called American Autoshield again and spoke to ****** who said the inspection was scheduled for today, but he never showed **. ** the meantime, the AAmco owner, ***** called American Autoshield who told him they needed another 24 hours. At this point, I authorized Aamco to go ahead and fix the transmission as I had paid for vacation plans for the 4th of July week and needed my car back. On Thursday, June 30, I called American Autoshield and spoke to Rob who told me they needed another 48 hours. AAmco repaired my transmission and I picked ** on Friday, July 1, in time for my vacation I'd paid for months earlier. I paid AAmco $4200.34 from my own pocket! American Autoshield technician finally came in on July 7, after the holiday weekend. That's 18 days AFTER American Autoshield had the estimate from AAmco! American Autoshield denied my claim because the car was no longer at the repair shop! I am seeking to recover my out*of pock $4200.34.
Business Response
Date: 08/12/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and AAS serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on March 5, 2021. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called AAS on June 14, 2022. The ** reported the vehicle had been towed to the ** and the customer complained that the vehicle would not move. The ** found a diagnostic trouble code (a "DTC") P0740 (torque converter clutch error). The ** provided its estimate for repairs on June 20, 2022. AAS asked the ** on June 24, 2022, to obtain the customer's authorization for RDI (remove, disassemble,and inspect - a tear down).

The ** advised AAS on June 27, 2022, that the vehicle was ready for an inspection, and an inspection was scheduled on June 28, 2022. The inspection service advised AAS on June 30, 2022, that the ** was on vacation until after the Fourth of July holiday and the inspection would occur on July 5, 2022. The inspection service then advised AAS on July 11, 2022, that the vehicle had been repaired and removed from the **.

The claim was denied on July 11, 2022, due to repairs being performed without prior authorization. This is an exclusion to coverage found in Section D.2.a. of the *** and at the bottom of each and every contract page.

The claim was reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic, who determined the adjudication required modification. The Specialist spoke with the ** and the customer, and the failures are not electrical in nature. However, as the repair has been performed, AAS can no longer review photos as the replaced parts have been returned for core fees.

The customer will be reimbursed pursuant to the terms of the ***. AAS considers this complaint resolved.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/12/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
*************************, the senior adjuster for AHS called me on 8.11.22 to inform me they had reversed their initial decision denying the claim and they were sending me a check for $4,200.34 for my out of pocket expense. I appreciate his professionalism and expedience. I will continue to do business with AHS.

Sincerely,

***************************
Initial Complaint
Date:08/02/2022
Type:Order Issues
Status:
AnsweredMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
I started with Carshield when I bought my car in September. I have been paying them all this time and they denied my claim. They are making things up in an effort to get out of paying out on my repairs. They tried to say my car had a branded title. I called the *** and they ran the **** and it is a clear title. Everything the repair needs is covered under my contract. I have the original title.
Business Response
Date: 08/11/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and *** serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on September 9, 2022. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage, benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

AAS reached out to the customer outside the ******************** forum prior to receipt of this complaint. We have reached a mutually agreeable, confidential settlement with her. As such, *** considers the complaint resolved.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.
Initial Complaint
Date:08/01/2022
Type:Service or Repair Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
My car has been in the shop for a month. I have a failed engine. The dealership told American Auto Shields why I have a failed engine. American Auto Shields said that wasnt good enough. American Auto Shields is trying not to pay for my engine. My engine is covered under my policy. This company is fradulent and have been taking my money for three years on both of my vehicles. I want my car fixed! This company needs to be shut down for false advertisement.Desired Resolution: Replace my engine!
Business Response
Date: 08/05/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and *** serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on April 2, 2021. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage, benefits,and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called AAS on July 13, 2022. The ** reported the vehicle had been towed to the ** and the customer complained about a fuel leak under the hood. The ** found two pages of diagnostic trouble codes ("DTCs") and performed a compression test. The ** found a failed camshaft. The customer was smelling raw fuel because the valves were not open. The ** reported the engine had been replaced in 2012 at ****** miles. The ** also provided its estimate for repairs at that time.

The customer called AAS on July 14, 2022, to learn whether the claim had been authorized and for information regarding a rental vehicle. The adjuster discussed the claim with the ** on July 15, 2022 and advised the ** that AAS would need a verifiable cause of failure. The ** was seeking engine replacement due to metal debris from the failure, and AAS would need to see the failure and the extent of metal debris to justify an engine replacement for a broken camshaft (as reported by the **). The ** stated it would obtain the customer's authorization for RDI (remove, disassemble, and inspect - a tear down), and *** advised the customer on July 15, 2022, that she would need to authorize RDI for the claim to proceed.

The customer provided her statement of the issue on July 19, 2022. She had owned the vehicle for one year. She first noticed an issue with the vehicle on July 5, 2022, when she heard loud noises coming from the vehicle. The check engine light was illuminated, and smoke was emitting from the tailpipe.

The ** advised AAS on July 19, 2022, that the vehicle was ready for an inspection. The vehicle was inspected by an independent, third-party inspection service on July 20, 2022. ******* pan and the #5 camshaft bearing had been removed. The inspector found the #5 main bearing cap was scored and heated metal was found in the oil pickup, the oil pan, and the oil filter. The inspector found possible previous repairs to the left cylinder head based on the color of the camshaft actuators. The engine was contaminated with metal. The inspector's findings were consistent with a failure of the #5 crankshaft main bearing. Further disassembly and diagnosis was required to determine the cause and extent of damage.

The inspection report, including photos provided with the report, was reviewed by AAS on July 26, 2022. The photos showed that the vehicle was overdue for an oil change and filter according to stickers on the vehicle. There appeared to be sediment in the engine's oil pan that could be early sludge buildup. The camshaft phasers appeared to be of different colors, indicating possible recent replacement. There was no demonstrated cause of failure to show the source of the metal in the engine. AAS asked the ** to provide more photos of the failed bearing that they believed caused the extensive amount of metal debris. The customer questioned why AAS was requesting further information, and AAS explained that we needed to see the cause of failure. (The customer is referred to Section F. of the ***.)

AAS had an extensive call with the ** on July 27, 2022. The ** explained that it believed the damage to the bearing that was showing signs of a groove being worn into it was due to the crankshaft rubbing it or from debris getting wedged into the side of the bearing. The ** stated one cylinder (on the driver's side) had been replaced and all three bad holes (1, 3, and 5) were on the same side. The head on the passenger's side was showing wear in excess of the allowed limit. The crankshaft appeared to be smooth, but the ** found substantial surface damage when dragging a fingernail across the surface. The ** provided several other areas of concern that would require additional RDI:crankshaft endplay, chains and tensioners, guides, actuators, all rod caps, all wrist pins, and all pistons. The **, in conclusion, stated that the entire engine was suspect, due to prior repairs, as this could be a contributing factor if metal was already distributed throughout the engine. The ** had low confidence that there were any usable parts remaining.

AAS then requested additional service records to determine whether the present failures were the result of improper repairs by another repair facility. The customer had provided only one service record, and there should be additional records as the *** was 462 days and ****** miles into coverage. AAS asked for information regarding the new cylinder head, and the customer advised that she purchased the vehicle used and did not have the cylinder head replaced at any time.

At the present time, additional RDI and additional service records are required to move the claim forward. AAS needs to know the source of the metal,and only minimal RDI has been performed.

The claim was reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic, and by a Legal Claims Specialist for AAS (the "Specialist"). This claim did not move forward due to the required verification of the failure and a request for records due to the new parts on the engine. Though the engine was replaced under the manufacturer's warranty in 2012, this has no bearing on the current claim. The photos provided with the inspection report are confusing as there is a fairly large amount of metal in the pan and very little, if any, failure demonstrated to the main bearings or crankshaft.

The Specialist is concerned that the diagnosis originally reported indicated that camshaft failed and that caused a fuel smell from vehicle. There is no further mention of the camshaft throughout the claim, but there are both fuel trim and air volume codes present in the list provided by the **. The vehicle has also been mildly modified;this includes some aftermarket wiring under the dash, a cold air intake, and aftermarket wheels and tires.

There is also a concern related to a large mileage discrepancy between the records provided and the CarFax report. There is a record in CarFax that shows a major mileage inconsistency. It is also worth noting the vehicle has been in four documented collisions, one of them being reported as severe.

To proceed with this claim, AAS must collect the record from the major mileage discrepancy shown, as after this discrepancy there was a nearly one year and ******+ mileage gap in between this and the next service. After the records are provided, the ** must perform RDI (remove, disassemble, and inspect - a tear down) to verify the source of the metal in the oil pan. Once we are able to get photo documentation showing the cause of this metal buildup/engine failure, AAS should be able to make a claim determination.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/05/2022

Complaint: 17653772

I am rejecting this response because:

Sincerely,

*********************************
I reject your response. First you are holding me accountable for things that happen to my car when I was NOT THE ****** And what mileage discrepancy? I gave you all the oil change services that you requested. If you would bother to call me I could discuss this with you. Your company take people money and refuse to provide services. That is why you are not accredited by Better Business Bureau. You should be SHUT DOWN! You have to thousand of complaints.
Customer Answer
Date: 08/10/2022
American Auto Shield lied about the response they gave. The first thing that they lied about is I didn't give them the three consecutive service records on my car. The second thing that they lied about is that I bought after market tires for my car. I gave them a service record that I bought brand new tires on my car and I put brand new brakes on my car. Also, they are trying to make me provide service records on parts of the engine that had worked done. I told them over and over again I didn't repair anything dealing with my engine. The owner before me must have made the repairs. They are trying not to pay for my engine when it is covered in my policy. American Auto Shields/Carshields rip me off for three years!
Business Response
Date: 08/15/2022
Better Business Bureau:

American Auto Shield accepts the arbitration offer with reference to complaint ID #********.

Sincerely,
American Auto Shield

Customer Answer
Date: 08/29/2022
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of Arbitration. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Better Business Bureau:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID .********, , and find that arbitration is necessary.
Sincerely,
*********************************
Initial Complaint
Date:08/01/2022
Type:Service or Repair Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
My name is ******* Yanzu, and I'm filing this complaint against America Auto Shield for not being a reliable automobile needs provider and an overall bad customer service. My contract # is MRF ******* I took my car to Ammco transmission for a check-up because my car was driving funny. That was on July 12 2022 My car was eventually diagnosed with a transmission problem,a torque converter problem. And a claim was submitted on the 15th July 2022. Three days after bad customer service experience the claim specialist left me a message my claim was denied because the color of My transmission fluid was very dark an implication that my transmission haven't been serviced upon since I purchased the car in 2018. Wrong!!! And the fact that I was confronted to make provision of any previous services on my transmission before ther determination of denial is still having some lingering thoughts in my mind even if im with the right warranty service business. In short the basis for denial was very porous and weak. I have a CVT transmission which is only serviced under certain types of conditions. 1) Driving while towing 2) Using a car-top carrier and 3) Using your car for heavy loading after ******* or 144 months (12yrs). The question now is I'm not driving under any of the mentioned conditions why SHOULD MY. CLAIM BE DENIED? Even with all these I still gave my car a complete tune-up which includes transmission fluid change. I spoke with ***** he told me to submit proofs of previous oil change and where it states in the owners manual the above stated conditions, yet no one seems to be interested in repairing my car. From customer service to the escalating team ********,***** and ******* have provided me with on and on bad customer service experiences. ******************** please help me to get this resolved. Below I've submitted the proof of previous transmission work DONE on my car and an attached documents for the inspector/ Adjuster to prove why his denial wasn't AUTHENTIC. Thanks.
Business Response
Date: 08/03/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and AAS serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on June 2, 2022. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called AAS on July 13, 2022. The vehicle was driven to the ** and the customer stated that the vehicle had an excessive shudder when driving under 50 MPH. The ** found that there was a severe torque converter shudder, and that the transmission had a slip in gears 2-5 and a late shift condition in gears 2 and 4. The ** also noted that the transmission fluid was varnished and burned, indicating an internal transmission failure. On July 14, 2022 AAS requested service records from the customer to determine whether the required maintenance had been performed on the vehicle. AAS explained to the customer that the transmission fluid being varnished could indicate that the necessary maintenance had not been performed, which would disqualify the claim from coverage under the terms of the ***. AAS received the service records on July 18, 2022.

On July 19, 2022 an independent third party inspection was performed on the vehicle. The inspector found that the transmission fluid was black and completely burnt and contained debris. The inspection also revealed that the vehicle shuddered when shifting gears and skipped the 3rd gear on one occasion. The inspector stated that this indicated internal transmission failure, but the cause of failure was yet to be determined. The same day, AAS reviewed the vehicles service records and found that there were only records of two recent oil changes and no records of transmission service. AAS confirmed with a local ****** dealer that a transmission service was due every 100 thousand miles for this vehicle. Under the terms of the ***, the customer is required to perform all necessary maintenance in order to be eligible for coverage, and according to the dealer this should have included two transmission services since the vehicles purchase. AAS requested records for these transmission services from the customer the same day.

On July 20, ***************************************************************************************************************************************** order to verify proper maintenance. The customer did not wish to provide these records and stated that the ** told him his vehicle did not need transmission service at this point in his ownership. AAS requested that the customer provide a written statement from the ** indicating that the transmission service was not required. The customer provided AAS with additional service records on July 21, 2022 which showed records of one transmission service, as well as his vehicles service manual. Upon further review, AAS determined that the transmission fluid had been serviced as necessary, and therefore, on August 1, 2022, AAS reopened the claim.

The matter was reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS (the Specialist), an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic.The Specialist determined that the claim should not have been denied and that the decision to reopen the claim was correct. On August 2, ************************************************************* order to move the claim forward. AAS will continue to work with the customer and ** to fully resolve this claim in accordance with the terms of the ***.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/05/2022

Better Business Bureau:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Sincerely,
******* Yanzu
Initial Complaint
Date:07/29/2022
Type:Service or Repair Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
I have been paying for carshield and my car is at a repair shop last 4 days waiting on an adjuster. I have done everything im Supposed to do in maintaining my car. Which they have all the records .. My engine light came On, took it right back to repair shop and they trouble shooted everything and I paid for repairs that were thought to have fixed the problem ..no light on ..good **** day later light came back on while driving it so drove it 4 miles back to shop. Repair shop says my cam shaft might need replaced .it is a covered part but car shied refuses to pay for replacement because they said I drove it to shop instead of having it towed ...my car was drivable and light was not on at first but came on while driving and I immediately drove it to shop . it was not smoking it was not having Any issues while driving it to repair shop ..just engine light on..and so car shield is using this as an excuse in not paying for a covered part in my car ..i need my car back and I need car shield to abide by our contract so that I can get my car repaired and returned back to me.
Business Response
Date: 08/03/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and AAS serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on November 21, 2021. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

The customer submitted a previous claim for repair of the fuel injectors. The repair facility, which was the same repair facility as the second claim, had performed spark plug and ignition coil work a week previously. The customer picked up the vehicle, and the problem returned. The repair facility tested the fuel injector, and there appeared to be an internal fault in the injector for cylinder #2. That claim was authorized on June 19, 2022.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called AAS on July 26, 2022. The ** reported the vehicle was driven to the ** and the customer complained that the check engine light was illuminated and there were misfires. The ** stated it had replaced the spark plugs, coils, and injector for cylinder #2 (see previous claim). The compression test was within specifications. The ** removed the valve cover on the passenger side of the engine (the same side as cylinder #2). The exhaust tappet on cylinder #2 was moving half as much as the others. The ** reported a diagnostic trouble code (a DTC) of P0302, a misfire with cylinder #2. The ** reported the oil was good and full and there were no leaks.

AAS called the customer on July 26, *********** that she provide copies of service and maintenance records for the past twelve months and call AAS to provide her statement of the issue. The customer stated she had owned the vehicle for four years, and she first noticed an issue on July 25, 2022. The check engine light was illuminated and the vehicle was stuttering and misfiring. The vehicle was driven to the **. The customer stated she had previously provided copies of all the service records available and her husband performed some of the oil changes. She did not keep receipts or maintenance logs.

The ** provided its estimate for repairs on July 27, 2022. The same day, the ** stated that the vehicle was moved to its facility from another repair facility because the other facility was not equipped to work on the vehicle. AAS explained that service records were required to verify maintenance, and the ** advised it would not perform RDI (remove, disassemble, and inspect a tear down) until AAS had the vehicles service history. AAS then again requested service records from the customer. Additional records were provided that day by the customer.

The customer called AAS on July 29, 2022, to dispute the handling of the claim. She had been told that the camshaft would not be covered because she had driven the vehicle to the **. The customer was advised at that time that no determination had yet been made. The customer then called AAS on August ******, to dispute any continued operation of the vehicle.

The claim was reviewed by a Legal Claims Specialist for AAS (the Specialist). This claim has been delayed largely due to the **s misdiagnosis of coils and plugs,for which the customer paid out-of-pocket. The ** is now reporting that the cylinder 2 lifter has failed and caused subsequent damage to the camshaft and possibly the engine due to metal intrusion. The *** will have coverage for the lifter and camshaft as those failures occur very quickly. There will be no coverage for the engine replacement due to metal intrusion as this failure can only be caused by continued operation. The customer has admitted to driving to various repair facilities multiple times without having the vehicle towed.

The vehicle must be inspected to demonstrate the camshaft/lifter failure to verify it is coverable by the ***. AAS should be able to make a determination after the inspection report comes back. This claim will be moved forward for authorization on the lifter and camshaft provided the inspection report does not show any exclusions as contributing to the failure. There will be no further coverage on the engine due to continued operation. AAS can offer nothing further at this time. AAS will continue to work with the ** and the customer to bring this claim to a resolution.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.
Customer Answer
Date: 08/04/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to
I will accept but will say that there Is a statement that says o drove my vehicle to various locations that is not correct I only took it to one location ************** ..i called another location before I took to lees hill after told on phone call to downtown garage they were behind 2 weeks .i only drove my vehicle after I was told it was fixed and I can come pick it up .and only then while driving it the engine light came back on and I drove it back to lees hill 4 miles back to auto shop each time I was told it was fixed .so lets correct that continuous driving scenario
Sincerely,

***********************
Initial Complaint
Date:07/28/2022
Type:Order Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
Per my contract with American Auto Shield (contract MRF1470132 section C.1.a) They are required to reimburse tows to a repair facility. I have had to have my car towed 12 different occasions and I have provided receipts of these 12 tows for reimbursement to *********************************** over phone and have used the document upload tool at https://americanautoshield.com/document-upload/ several times.I have received no reimbursement whatsoever for these tows. American Autoshield is failing to upload its end of the contract (section C.1.a)
Business Response
Date: 08/03/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("AAS") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and AAS serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on October 31, 2019. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is AAS.

The customer complains that he was not properly reimbursed for twelve tows. The customer has submitted eleven claims. The *** provides for roadside assistance and towing at no cost to the customer. The customer is referred to Section C.1. of the ***. The *** provides for a maximum tow reimbursement per occurrence (i.e., for each claim).

The claims were reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for AAS, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic. Twelve invoices for tows were not provided to AAS. The customer submitted a total of four towing invoices. Those invoices were not paid because insufficient customer information was provided. The tows were all performed by the same tow service and date back to 2020. The first tow was dated November 2, 2020, and lines up with claim numbered 1094035. The tow date was two weeks prior to the breakdown, and claim records reflecting the customers statement given to AAS at that time indicate that the vehicle was driven in. The second tow was dated April 3, 2021. There were no claims submitted around that time period. The third tow was August 24, 2021. This relates to claim numbered ******* (for a water pump), and there are claim notes that the vehicle was towed. The fourth tow was May 26, 2022, and relates to claim numbered ******* (for a starter).

The Senior Legal Claims Specialist has now authorized these four tows for reimbursement at the maximum amount allowable under the terms of the ***. AAS can offer nothing further at this time. So far, the *** has provided coverage for claims that exceed three times the value of the vehicle.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/03/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********. I was only able to find tow receipts so for for 5 of the 12 tows I had. I do not see the 5th invoice I submitted listed in your response and I am attaching it now. The tow date was for 6-22-22, and was related to the alternator replacement claim. Please add this to the 4 tows to be reimbursed, bringing the total to 5 that I have found receipts for. Reimburse all 5 and I will consider this matter closed.

Sincerely,

*************************
Initial Complaint
Date:07/28/2022
Type:Service or Repair Issues
Status:
ResolvedMore info
Complaint statuses
Resolved:
The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.
Unresolved:
The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.
Answered:
The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.
Unanswered:
The business failed to respond to the dispute.
Unpursuable:
BBB is unable to locate the business.
My vehicle has been in the repair shop for nearly 3 months. The claims adjuster from American auto shield has requested several documents, proving my transmission is at fault. Per American auto shield, the adjuster has 48 business hours to review the documents and come up with a decision regarding my claim. The adjuster, on more than one occasion, has taken more than the allotted 48 hours to make a decision and then requests another document after I have called and complained. I have escalated the issue, which the escalation department was supposed to have a resolution within 24 business hours and also failed to have any resolution after 36 business hours. I have been without a vehicle for nearly 3 months. In the contract, it states that I am allowed a rental vehicle for up to a certain amount of time while my vehicle is being serviced. American auto shield does not cover the cost of a rental vehicle, unless my repair has been approved. The service department at *** and at another facility has sent every possible document showing a faulty transmission which needs to be replaced. I have contacted American auto shield numerous times and get no resolution. Now American auto shield has requested a teardown of my transmission, which I am required to pay for, to determine the reason for the fault. *** transmissions are a closed system which do not require any sort of maintenance, therefore negligence isnt a possibility for causing the fault. I feel that American auto shield is purposely not following through on their part of the contract. I pay my **** every month on time and expect American auto shield to follow through with their part of the contract.
Business Response
Date: 08/03/2022
Thank you for bringing this customers concerns to our attention and for the opportunity to respond.

As an initial matter, American Auto Shield ("***") does not sell contracts, insurance, extended warranties, or warranties. Sales of vehicle service contracts ("***s") are handled by independent sellers, and *** serves only to administer the repair claims. In this instance, the customer purchased a month-to-month *** on February 25, 2022. The *** had a wait period of twenty days and 500 miles or forty days and 250 miles. The customer reported the mileage as ****** at the time of *** purchase. A copy of the customer's *** was provided to the customer shortly after purchase. The sales call and the first page of text encourage all *** holders to read their contract. The *** has clearly stated coverage,benefits, and exclusions. Customers who decide the *** is not right for them can obtain a full refund. Customers who choose to keep the *** are bound by its terms, as is ***.

This claim was opened by the customer's chosen repair facility (the ***** when it called *** on May 13, 2022, seventy-one days after purchase of the ***. The ** reported the vehicle had been driven to the ** and the customer complained that the transmission was not working. The ** performed a diagnostics scan and checked the oil level. The ** reported a diagnostic trouble code (a ***) 004F85 (ratio monitoring, clutch EGS19D; engage gear 4/2 not possible). The ** reported the fluid level was full and the fluid was not burnt and did not contain contaminants. *** asked the ** to provide its estimate for repairs and to complete the diagnostic form.

*** scheduled an independent, third-party inspection,and the fully assembled vehicle was inspected on May 26, 2022. The **s technician took the inspector on a test drive to demonstrate the transmission failure. The transmission operated as designed during the test drive. The check engine light was illuminated. The technician demonstrated the *** reported by the ** and refused to clear the code and rescan, stating he needed to be paid to hook up the scanner again. There was no dipstick to check the transmission fluid, and the technician stated the ** did not have a transmission fluid analyzer. An inspection of the vehicle underside showed what appeared to be a fluid leak. The inspector could not determine the source of the leak. No failure was demonstrated to the inspector.

*** asked the ** on June 10, 2022, to provide a copy of the test plan for review. This was received later that day. However,the test plan included only a listing of ***s, and *** asked the ** on June 14,2022, to resend a complete copy of the test plan. The test plan was received by *** on June 30,2022.

A CarFax report was pulled and reviewed by *** on July 5, 2022. The report showed the starting mileage (******) was ***** miles less than the last reported mileage on the CarFax report. The customer was asked to provide records to clarify the mileage discrepancy. The claim became inactive while *** awaited records to clarify the mileage question. The customer was asked on July 26, 2022, to provide a copy of the **** of sale and service records. The customer advised that service records were not available since the vehicle was purchased in March 2022.

The customer provided a copy of the **** of sale on July 28, 2022. The **** of sale was dated January 2, 2022, and did not contain the mileage; therefore, this record could not be used to clarify the mileage question. The claim could not move forward until the customer provided verifiable records to clarify the inception mileage of the vehicle.

The claim was reviewed by a Senior Legal Claims Specialist for ***, an ASE-Certified Master Mechanic (the Specialist). After the claim progressed, the ** was less than helpful and there was no real verified failure. Additional diagnosis was requested but was not provided. The inspection report stated the inspector found leaks from the transmission; this was confirmed on the **s initial repair order, which stated the transmission fluid level needed to be checked. A review of the **s diagnosis chart indicated the only *** set was possibly due to a low fluid level.

A PPI report was pulled and it showed the last mileage reported from 2021 was higher than the start mileage of the *** on 2/25/2022 (******). Records were requested; nothing other than the **** of sale that had no mileage on it has been provided. The Specialist then pulled the full CarFax report, and using mileage reported from a prior entry for service at another dealership, the Specialist estimates that the vehicle breakdown most likely occurred 243 miles into coverage, within the *** wait period.
The full CarFax report also identified the vehicle as a total loss in 2017. This was confirmed with the ***** There were multiple owners prior to the current customer. There is a chance the title has been washed at this point. Either way, since the customer does not have the rider for branded title, this will lead to a claim denial at the minimum.

The Specialist asked the *** Client ******************** to review both the mileage issue and the title issue. The Client ******************** determined the claim would be denied but the customer would be provided the option to add a rider for branded title coverage. If the customer declines this option, *** is willing to resolve this dispute amicably and offers to instruct the seller of the *** to cancel the *** and fully refund to the customer the payments made for the ***. This offer must be accepted within seven days of the filing of this response or the offer will be null and void. The customer should accept this offer by writing the **************** at *************************************** or by responding to the BBB.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/03/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Sincerely,

*******************
Customer Answer
Date: 08/05/2022

Complaint: 17637211

I am rejecting this response because:
I made a previous complaint regarding this business. See complaint ID: ********. The business offered a full refund for the service they neglected to provide. I accepted the offer initially and did as instructed by AAS to get my refund. I received an email containing a legal document which I am asked to sign to get the refund I was offered. No where in the initial offer did it state that I would be required to sign a ridiculous agreement to get reimbursed. I am not signing the document, which is further proof of this business being a scam.

Sincerely,

*******************
Business Response
Date: 08/15/2022
American Auto Shield corresponded with the customer through email. The matter has been resolved. ******************* Contract has been canceled and the customer has been fully refunded the payments made for the *************** Contract.

We trust the foregoing adequately addresses the issues raised in the complaint. Please do not hesitate to contact our legal department at *************************************** if you have questions.

Customer Answer
Date: 08/22/2022

Better Business Bureau:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Sincerely,

*******************

BBB Business Profiles may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes.

BBB Business Profiles are provided solely to assist you in exercising your own best judgment. BBB asks third parties who publish complaints, reviews and/or responses on this website to affirm that the information provided is accurate. However, BBB does not verify the accuracy of information provided by third parties, and does not guarantee the accuracy of any information in Business Profiles.

When considering complaint information, please take into account the company's size and volume of transactions, and understand that the nature of complaints and a firm's responses to them are often more important than the number of complaints.

BBB Business Profiles generally cover a three-year reporting period, except for customer reviews. Customer reviews posted prior to July 5, 2024, will no longer be published when they reach three years from their submission date. Customer reviews posted on/after July 5, 2024, will be published indefinitely unless otherwise voluntarily retracted by the user who submitted the content, or BBB no longer believes the review is authentic. BBB Business Profiles are subject to change at any time. If you choose to do business with this company, please let them know that you checked their record with BBB.

As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business. Businesses are under no obligation to seek BBB accreditation, and some businesses are not accredited because they have not sought BBB accreditation. BBB charges a fee for BBB Accreditation. This fee supports BBB's efforts to fulfill its mission of advancing marketplace trust.

Cookies on BBB.org

Complaints

Customer Complaints Summary

If you've experienced an issue

Filter and sort by

Sort by

Complaint status

Complaint type

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Business Response

Customer Answer

Business Response

Customer Answer

Business Response

Customer Answer

Business Response

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Customer Answer

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Complaint statuses

Business Response

Customer Answer

Customer Answer

Business Response

Customer Answer

American Auto Shield, LLC is NOT a BBB Accredited Business.