Complaints

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:06/27/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  Purchased a home warranty for our new home in November. AC unit needed replaced within the warranty coverage. Guard is denying our claimed based on information that is inaccurate. I have explained on 3 different occasions the corrections to their information with disregard from the claims department. I have asked to speak with the next person above the claims department and they denied me to leave a message for them.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/03/2025

  ******, 

  Were sorry to hear about your frustration regarding your air conditioning claim, and we appreciate the opportunity to clarify the situation.
  
  When your claim was submitted, you noted that the air conditioner last worked on May 1, 2024, which is prior to your policy start date of November 24, 2024. You also mentioned that you had only used the system once during your coverage term, and it did not function properly during that initial use. Additionally, your home inspection report indicated that the A/C was operating outside the normal temperature differential and recommended further evaluation and repair by a licensed HVAC contractor.
  
  Your claim was carefully reviewed by our Claims Manager, and based on all the information provided, it was determined that the unit was not in proper working order at the start of your contract. As a result, it is not eligible for coverage under the terms of your warranty.
  
  For reference, please see Section C.2. of your contract:
  The appliances or systems must be: 
  2) In good working order on the Service Plan Start Date.
  
  We hope this explanation helps provide clarity regarding the outcome of your claim. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/18/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  Today is 6-18-25 A couple weeks ago, I filed a claim for a busted duct near my hvac blower. They immediately tried to deny it based on another section of duct described in my home inspection. I had to fight with them just to get them to accept a tech coming to look. That didn't get to happen, as my AC was no longer cooling properly as the temperature got hotter the last few days. I called a different tech to check my AC unit, it was found to have been low on freon. R22, which is now banned. The only solution is to replace my AC unit. I notified the company that the scope of work has changed, as the required new system would replace the duct area that needed repaired. For roughly 10 hours, they refused to accept the claim, stating that completely unnecessary, or already competed tasks needed to be done. We talked to at least 6 different people, re-explaining the situation several times. They said a leak check needed done, it was. They repeated that several times. They said the leak needed to be found, and we explained several times that it was completely unnecessary as repairing the leak would not fix the fact that R22 is banned and the system cannot be recharged. Every time we made those statements, we would get transferred to a new person and the whole process would start over. They intentionally made the entire process as difficult as possible to cause frustration, forcing me to give up. I told them that if their only goal was to deny my claim then they should just do it because I wasn't going to repeat myself forever. They immediately closed the claim without so much as a response. I followed up stating the tasks they are requesting were either completed or unnecessary, and they are still repeating that the leak test needs done (it was.) They are not offering a realistic solution, they are not even trying to be reasonable. It's extremely obvious that every question they ask is them trying to find a way to deny the claim. As soon as we push back, they transfer.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/27/2025

  Hi *****,
  
  For both your ductwork and air conditioning claims, we rely on the technicians professional assessment to guide our decisions.
  
  Ductwork Claim:
  We received multiple indicationsincluding from you and the home inspection reportthat the ductwork was not in proper working order. You later clarified that the issue was in a different section, so we reopened your ticket and spoke directly with your technician. He informed us the ductwork had been improperly installed and temporarily patched with duct tape. Unfortunately, as outlined in Section G.11 of your contract, our warranty does not cover issues resulting from improper installation.
  
  We are not responsible for repairs related to improper installation
  
  Air Conditioning Claim:
  The technician initially told us there was a leak somewhere in the system but couldnt specify where. We explained to both you and the technician that a definitive diagnosis is required for coverage, which may include performing a leak test. The technician understood and agreed to call back with results. You later mentioned the system would be replaced, and we informed you that without a leak test and follow-up confirmation, we wouldnt be able to approve coverage for the replacement.
  
  We later offered to cover the cost of the leak test and asked again for the technician to contact us. Despite multiple attempts to reach him, we never received confirmation that the test was completed, so your ticket was closed. If the leak test was in fact performed, were still happy to review the claimjust have your technician call us with the results.
  
  We hope this helps clarify how both claims were handled. Please dont hesitate to reach out with any questions or if you'd like to move forward with the air conditioning claim.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/30/2025

   
  Complaint: 23488636
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  You have lied on multiple occasions.

  Ductwork Claim:

  "He informed us the ductwork had been improperly installed and temporarily patched with duct tape." - Lie. I was right next to him. My filing was that I found a broken section of ductwork on my HV** system. You tried to deny based on my home inspection stating ductwork patching was done. However, the area the inspector was referring to was the duct that ran to the back of the house, not a completely broken section near the blower. He was also clarifying that the previous duct repair was elsewhere in the house, and that the homeowner (me) had taped up the broken section as a stop gap until it could be repaired properly. 30-40% of my air was being blown out of the broken section of duct that I found, which was NOT in the home inspection. Without this stop gap, the loss of airflow to my house would have continued until a repair was made.

  Air Conditioning Claim:

  "The technician understood and agreed to call back with results. You later mentioned the system would be replaced, and we informed you that without a leak test and follow-up confirmation, we wouldnt be able to approve coverage for the replacement." - Lie. When you stated you needed a leak test performed, they informed you it already had been and that a leak was found. You even said as much in your service ticket #***** - By ***** ******: "The technician did confirm that as of right now they do not know what component is leaking." After this statement, you continued to state the leak test needed one. So which is it? The leak test was never performed or the tech could not find the leak? It cannot be both.

  "Despite multiple attempts to reach him, we never received confirmation that the test was completed" - Lie. From your ticket *****: "We have spoken with the technician, however they were unable to provide a definitive diagnosis for the leak in the air conditioning system." Again, which is it? You did or did not speak to him? It cannot be both.

  For annotation purposes I will clarify the timeline of events:

  06/02/25 - I found a large broken section of duct work near my blower. I filed a claim to get it repaired. After you initially denied, you agreed after I clarified the duct patch work that had been done prior to purchase. I (me, not the tech, not the previous homeowner, ME) placed more duct tape on the broken section to prevent unnecessary loss of air until a tech could look at it. I had the tech scheduled, but my ** issue started first. On 06/14/25, my ** was not working properly. It ran for ****************************************** my house continued to rise. Knowing it likely needed service, I had a tech come out on 06/15/25 to perform a "tune up/diagnosis." This was initially going to be a separate issue for me, not a claim. That resulted in the leak test showing there was a freon leak. The issue was the freon my old system used was R22, which is a banned freon. At that point, it did not matter where the leak was, as it was 100% impossible and illegal to replace the lost freon. The only option I had was to replace the ** unit and related parts. The first ****** we talked to on the phone understood and had me create a new ticket, *****

  For the BBB, I have clearly shown that the respondent is lying. I am happy to provide screenshot of these ticket conversations to prove so.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/03/2025

  *****,

  Were truly sorry for the confusion and frustration surrounding your claims. We understand how important clarity is in situations like this, and wed like to walk through your concerns one by one.
  
  Ductwork Claim:
  We rely on the technicians assessment provided during a recorded call to evaluate claims. In this case, the technician clearly stated that the section of ductwork in question was improperly installed. Due to some initial confusion about which section was being referred to, we asked the technician to specifically confirm whether the current issue was related to improper installationand he confirmed that it was.
  Unfortunately, our warranty does not cover issues caused by improper installation. For reference, please see Section D.14 of the contract:
  D. THE FOLLOWING ARE CONSIDERED STANDARD EXCLUSIONS:
  14. The lack of capacity, adequacy, efficiency, design or improper installation of any system, appliance, or electronic equipment.
  
  Air Conditioning Claim:
  The only time we spoke with your technician on a recorded line, he mentioned there was a leak in the system but did not identify the source of the leak. The representatives message you referenced was simply restating that the technician had not provided a definitive diagnosiswe still needed to know which component was leaking: the indoor evaporator coil or the outdoor condensing unit.
  A statement that theres a leak does not meet the criteria for a formal leak test. A proper diagnosis requires a nitrogen pressure test or dye test to determine the exact location of the leak. Theres no indication that such a test was performed during or after the technicians visit.
  
  Regarding Our Statements About the Technician:
  We have spoken with the technician; however, they were unable to provide a definitive diagnosis for the leak in the air conditioning system.
  This was to explain that while the technician acknowledged a leak, he didnt perform a test or identify which part of the system was leaking.
  Despite multiple attempts to reach them, we never received confirmation that the test was completed.
  This refers to our follow-up efforts after the initial call. We reached out several times to confirm whether a leak test had been done, but we never received a response.
  Neither of these statements indicates that a leak test had been completed or that we had received any confirmation from your technician.
  
  We hope this breakdown helps clarify the decisions and steps taken on your claims. If youre able to have your technician complete a formal leak test and provide the results, wed be happy to review the claim again.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/15/2025

  Type:Product 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.

  On 6/5/25 a home warranty claim was filed due to back up of water inside my house in the basement drain. Ticket # *****. ******** Plumbing came to my house and snaked the drain. The fee was about $500. Guardian Home Warranty denied payment of the claim. The pipes are a part of my house. Guardian is responsible for reimbursement of the claim.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/17/2025

  ****,
  
  Per our phone conversation, we were able to provide a resolution on this complaint. Thank you for working through this with us.
  
  Guard Home Warranty

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/26/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  To start, we purchased our home from the previous owner in June 2024. At the time of buying the house, the house already had a home warranty from this company that the previous owner purchased and was transferred to myself and my wife. We tried to use this warranty to cover the costs of having our hot water heater replaced. The warranty company is giving us any excuse they can not to pay the reimbursement of the water heater to us. First, we were told that the plumbing company that replaced the water heater was supposed to call the warranty company before replacing the water heater. The plumbing company told us they do not call warranty companies and if the warranty company had any questions they could call them(the plumbing company). I should also mention, that the warranty company has tried to backtrack what was said to us by their company. Saying that what we were told was told to us by a trainee and was incorrect. The warranty company also states that they're company is just a reimbursement company and they do not pay the plumbing company directly. The customer(myself and my wife) are made to pay the plumbing company and HOPE the warranty company will do what they were paid for and reimburse what we paid. Having said that, the plumbing company said the water heater had outlived it's manufacturer warranty of 9 years or the warranty that the plumbing company gives for the water heater. The plumbing company we called had put the last/broken and replaced by us, water heater in and said that it had lived it's full expected life and at that point could go bad at any time. Having said that, there was no way around needing a new water heater which is also what the warranty company is trying to do to get out of reimbursing us the money we spent. I have all the emails if needed and have documented how things are going. It's quite several emails, so that's why they are not all attached.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/28/2025

  *****
  
  Thank you for sharing your concerns. We understand your frustration and want to clarify our claims process.
  
  Per your Guard Home Warranty contract (Section E.3), we require that you or your contractor contact us for authorization before any repairs are made. This step is necessary so we can confirm coverage and speak with the diagnosing technician. Unfortunately, in your case, the water heater was replaced before we were contacted, and we could not verify the failure or authorize the repair.
  
  We realize some contractors may be unwilling to call us directly. In these cases, we ask that you call us while the technician is on site and let us know that the contractor will not speak with us.   This is standard policy, and is clearly stated in both your contract and our communications. In situations where the technician is unable or unwilling to speak directly with us, you can call us while the technician is still on site and place us on speakerphone. We can ask you the necessary questions, and you can relay our questions to the technician and their answers back to us. This allows us to gather the information we need to assess your claim and keep the process moving forward.
  
  Because prior authorization was not obtained, we are unable to reimburse for this repair. For future claims, please ensure you contact us before any work is performed so we can assist you and confirm eligibility.
  
  We appreciate your understanding and are happy to answer any further questions.
  
  Sincerely,
  Guard Home Warranty Claims Team

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/29/2025

   
  Complaint: 23378582
  
  I am rejecting this response because:I am rejecting this response because: nothing that was communicated to us stated that. And as far as the warranty itself, when did the company give us a copy of the warranty? Because we sure don't have a copy. As stated, we bought the house with the warranty already in place and was supposed to be transferred over to us. We never received any type of warranty paperwork from anyone or signed anything. The emails we received said the warranty company needed to speak to the technician. It did not say anywhere in the emails what was supposed to be done if the technician would not speak to the warranty company. And again, this whole thing comes down to, the warranty company is a reimbursement company only and they are to reimburse the homeowner. The homeowner is allowed to use any company they choose to do the work according to the warranty company. So, I don't understand what the problem here is? There's no way around the fact that the water heater needed to be replaced. If there was, I certainly would have gone that route, as this water heater has cost me out of pocket close to $2,000.

  
  

  Sincerely,

  
  

  ***** *****
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *****

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/11/2025

  *****
  
  Your contract was emailed to the address we have on file on July 2, 2024. In that contract, it clearly outlines that we need to speak with the technician before any work is done so we can verify coverage and provide proper authorization.
  
  We do understand your concern that the contract doesnt specifically say that you must call us if a contractor refuses to speak with us. That said, the requirement for prior authorization still applies. If the technician isnt willing to talk to us, giving us a quick call in that moment would have allowed us to help navigate the situation and possibly find another way to get the information we needed.
  
  When something unexpected comes up during the claim process, we really encourage homeowners to reach out. Even if its just to check in, it helps us protect your coverage and gives us a chance to step in and assist before things move forward.
  
  We appreciate your understanding and are happy to help with any future claims. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/12/2025

   
  Complaint: 23378582
  
  I am rejecting this response because:this business is a scam business. I am not the only consumer they have done this way. They say they emailed me, no one emailed me anything. And as far as a contract, a contract needs to be signed, we didn't sign anything. They clearly state, they are only a reimbursement company and they reimburse the homeowner not the technician or technician's company. They ask to speak to the technician so they can find any way around paying out as well. I looked through the company's ****** reviews and even technicians who spoke to the company left negative reviews saying the company looked and asked questions trying to find a way out of paying. As I previously stated, our technician said our water heater needed to be replaced and that it had gone through it's whole life cycle being that it was already 9 years old. So, again, we're back to what difference is speaking to the technician going to make when the technician was going to tell them it needed to be replaced as well? Bottomline, is this company is a scam and waste of money and at the very least the public needs to know before wasting their money on a fraudulent home warranty.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *****

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/06/2025

  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.

  Our claim to have AC either repaired or fixed was denied by the company because they think we are not providing correct information and pre-existing conditions. We purchased a home 6 months ago and our AC did not work this spring. We did however use it a couple times in the fall. There was some communication failures on our part but my husband has tried to straighten those miscommunications out but they still do not think we are telling the truth. All claims are submitted online and there is not an option to speak with a human being when filing the claim. This may have resolved the communication errors. But they continue to say our problem was pre-existing and that they believe we arent telling the truth about our situation therefore denying our claim. I truthfully think that with the amount of money they would have had to spend, they would have found any way to get out of paying.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/09/2025

  ******* and ******* ******
  
  When submitting a claim, there are several questions included on the submission form to help us properly evaluate the issue. One of these questions asks, "When did it last work without any issues?"to which you responded with the date September 12, 2024. However, your coverage did not begin until October 11, 2024. At the end of the form, you also acknowledged that the information provided was accurate by checking the box that states: "I confirm that the above information is accurate."
  
  Additionally, your ticket includes the comment: "We moved into the home in November and didnt need to use the unit until this spring." and "So the first time we turned it on after moving into the home it wasnt working."
  
  Per the terms of your service contract, we do not cover failures that are identified when a system is used for the first time during the coverage period. Based on the information you provided, this situation falls under what is defined in the contract as a First-Time Use Pre-Existing Condition, which is not eligible for coverage.
  
  Please see Section C.1 of our contract:
  1. Air ************************************ central air conditioning, ducted electric wall air conditioning up to 5 (five) ton capacity and designed for residential use. In instances where multiple Air Conditioning/Cooler units exist, and additional optional coverage is not purchased, coverage extends to the primary Air Conditioning/Cooler unit.  For the purposes of this Service Plan, the primary Air Conditioning/Cooler unit is defined as the unit predominantly responsible for cooling the primary living area and kitchen of the Residential Property.  All components and parts, for units below 13 SEER and when We are unable to facilitate repair/replacement of failed covered equipment at the current SEER rating, repair/replacement will be performed with 13 SEER equipment and/or 7.7 HSPF or higher. NOTE:  We will pay up to $250 per Coverage Period for refrigerant.  Customer is responsible for payment of any costs in excess of $250.
  NOT COVERED: Gas air conditioning systems Mini-Splits (non ducted) Condenser casings Registers and Grills Filters Electronic air cleaners Window units Non-ducted wall units Water towers Humidifiers Improperly sized, improperly installed and improperly repaired units/systems Chillers All exterior condensing, cooling and pump pads Roof mounts, jacks, stands or supports Evaporator coil pan Commercial grade equipment Cost for crane rentals Air conditioning with mismatched condensing unit and evaporative coil per manufacturer specifications Improper use of metering devices Refrigerant conversion Leak detections Water leaks Drain line stoppages Maintenance Noise.  We are not responsible for the costs associated with matching dimensions, brand or color.  Unless the Guard Plus Add-On is purchased and subject to the limitations specified under Section C.11 Guard Plus Optional Coverage, We will not pay for any modifications necessitated by the repair of existing equipment or the installation of new equipment. Upgrades or modifications encompass, but are not limited to, costs associated with plenums and refrigerant line sets, electrical, gas, and ductwork. Unless the Guard Plus Add-On is purchased and subject to the limitations specified under Section C.11 Guard Plus Optional Coverage, We do not cover any upgrades, components or parts for existing equipment required to maintain compatibility with the covered replacement system manufactured to have minimum efficiency as currently mandated by federal, state or local governments.  Failures identified when a covered system is used for the first time within the Coverage Period.
  
  We hope this explanation provides clarity on how this decision was made in accordance with the terms of your contract.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/12/2025

   
  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,
  
  ******* ******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:04/04/2025

  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 received a Guard Home Warranty with the purchase of the home referenced above. My refrigerator stopped working today. When plugged in, when the compressor kicked on, the *** breaker would blow. I completed the questionnaire and opened service ticket *****. My request was denied since the refrigerator is located in the basement of the home. When I called customer service and requested an appeal, since the refrigerator in question is the only one in the home, and the only way to keep my food from spoiling. A representative with Guard Home Warranty (on a recorded line) advised that they would only cover the appliance if it was located in the kitchen. And further affirmed that if we moved the refrigerator to the kitchen they would honor my service request. I feel like Im being asked to jump through hoops to get service that was paid for.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/07/2025

  ******,

  
  We sincerely apologize for the experience youve had with our company. While our contract specifies that we only cover refrigerators located in the kitchen, we are going to reopen your ticket and proceed with your claim. You will receive further instructions regarding the next steps through the ticket communication.

  
  We hope this resolution helps address your concerns.
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/08/2025

   
  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,
  
  ****** ****

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/18/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  Guard Home Warranty was paid for via the previous home owner of the house I currently own. The first time we faced an issue, the ** Unit stopped working on one of the first hot days of the year. I filed a claim and was told it was a pre-existing condition as it was used for the first time since our homeownership. Well, I bought my house in March, so I didnt really need to use it until it became hot outside, right? So home warranty did nothing for me. I had to pay for someone to come out and fix it. Fast forward to January 2025. I start receiving 2-3 phonecalls a day from one of their sales representatives trying to sell me on another year with their services. At first, I was open minded. However, 2-3 calls a day is incessant. I understand sales positions need to have an aggressive attitude to obtain sales, but this is quite ridiculous. My contract expires on March 27th, 2025 and ironically, my hot water tank starts acting before finally dispensing no hot water. I filed a claim. I called a plumber. Plumber came out. Refused to speak to the warranty company on the phone. I have a 5 month old in my house who hasnt showered and were on day 2 with no hot water. Apparently, because we didnt call Guard and tell them the plumber refused to speak on the phone, we violated our contract which means Ill receive no reimbursement. While on the phone with one of their ***** I was told my call would be escalated and she gathered notes for my file. She never asked me for documentation from the plumber about the work needed. She told me if the technician refuses to speak to Guard, I can put Guard on speaker phone and ask the technician questions which they are forced to answer because Im their client. She stated its a bit of a work around. Their contracts also state it can take up to 24 hours to receive approval, so when in an emergency situation, what happens? I was told by the same representative thats not true, and it takes ***** minutes for approval or denial.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/03/2025

  ******* were sorry to hear that your experience with our warranty service did not meet your expectations. We strive to provide clear policy guidelines and efficient claim processing, and we regret any frustration you encountered.
  
  Regarding your AC claim, our policy requires that systems be in proper working order at the start of coverage. Since this was the first time the unit was used after purchasing the home, it falls under our first-time use policy, which excludes coverage for issues discovered upon initial operation. We understand that this can be disappointing, especially when discovering a problem for the first time.
  
  For your water heater claim, we do require technicians to communicate directly with us so we can verify the diagnosis and determine coverage. We understand that your plumbers company declined to speak with us, and we provided an alternative option to facilitate the process. We acknowledge that this situation was challenging, and we regret any miscommunication regarding our claim processing time. While approvals can often be completed quickly, complex cases may require additional review.
  
  Our goal is to ensure fair claim evaluations while following the terms of the contract. We appreciate your feedback and will use it to improve our communication and service. If you have any further concerns, were happy to discuss them with you.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/07/2025

   
  Complaint: 23084673
  
  I am rejecting this response because: 

  As someone who works in customer service and manages a business, how you treat your customers matters more than necessarily the offerings of your business. Your employee who recommended I call Guard Warranty and put the representative on speaker phone, backing my plumber into a corner after being told by his management to not speak with a warranty company lacks integrity and character. 
  

  I also do not understand how I as the customer of the plumbing company am told that they cannot speak with anyone from the warranty company, yet Guard contacts the same plumbing company after I file a complaint and suddenly the plumbing company discloses information? Ive seen no documentation from Guard regarding what was discussed. I did receive an email that claimed the plumber stated it was not normal wear and tear yet my trust has already been violated by this home warranty company, so Im a bit skeptical. 
  

  Lastly, what constitutes normal wear and tear in regards to a hot water tank? Whats normal for mine is not normal for someone with public sewage access. I have a well. The quality of my water is not the same as those getting it from a city line. 
  

  Id say the only positive experience Ive taken away from this is that ******, the sales representative who called me incessantly to renew my contract, finally stopped and again, I highly doubt it had anything to do with my complaint given that has never been addressed, but rather because the warranty is now expired and not renewed. **************** is NOT calling someone 3-4 times a day to renew a contract when clearly I am not a satisfied or happy customer for a product that I never could take advantage of. 

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/21/2025

  ******* thank you for taking the time to share your additional concerns. We appreciate the opportunity to clarify the details of your experience.
  
  Regarding your water heater claim, when your technician declined to speak directly with us, our team provided an alternative option that would allow us to gather the information needed to process the claim. In situations where the service provider will not engage directly, we try to help customers facilitate communication in a way that keeps the process moving forward and allows for a fair evaluation.
  
  Please see section E.3 of our service agreement:
  3. Upon the Service Provider arriving and diagnosing the issue, they must call Us at ************** prior to performing
  any repairs so that We can determine if the recommended repair or replacement is covered under the Service Plan.
  We will not reimburse for services performed without prior approval by Us.
  
  Following this, we did reach out to the plumbing company after being informed that the technician would not speak with us. This outreach was necessary to obtain clarification on the nature of the breakdown and ensure we had enough information to determine coverage accurately.
  
  Our claim decisions are based on the information provided by the diagnosing technician. In this case, the plumbing company communicated to **** a recorded linethat the issue with the water heater was not due to normal wear and tear. As our policy requires covered items to fail due to normal use over time, this determination directly impacted the claim outcome.
  
  Please see section D.1.b. of our service agreement:
  D. THE FOLLOWING ARE CONSIDERED STANDARD EXCLUSIONS:
  1. Any failure that affects the proper operation of a Covered Product caused by any of the following:
  b. Freezing, fire, wind, flood, lightning, ice, hail, snow, explosion, chemical, mold, mud, earthquake, soil
  movement, storm, pet damage, pest infestation or damage, vandalism, accident, inadequate fuel
  supply, or any other conditions that are not normal wear and tear.
  
  We appreciate your feedback and regret that your experience did not meet your expectations.
  
  Sincerely,

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/23/2025

   
  Complaint: 23084673
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  This company continues to circumvent responses without answering the question that is actually asked. Multiple questions still not answered. As I told one of your agents over the phone, I am unsure how anyone working for this company can sleep at night knowing its a scam being implemented on incident people spending money on a service they will never be able to benefit from. 
  

  I will continue to reject responses until this business takes responsibility for their immoral practices and answers their customers with honesty rather than ambiguity. 

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *******

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/15/2025

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  This company is a scam! After purchasing a new home, I received a one year home warranty with them. I had a plumbing issue and reached out to several plumbers in my area. The plumbers in my area all told me that they do not work with home warranty companies. Guard didnt even offer to recommend plumbing companies to me. I contacted ***********, who works with home warranty companies. Roto Rooter came out and diagnosed the problem. They spoke directly to a representative from Guard and gave them the cost for the repair. The total cost was $700. Guard is only covering $280.01. I asked that they review the claim/reimbursement amount again, they are standing by their amount which is not even half of what I paid. As I stated before, I called several times plumbers in my area - I asked how much the repair would be. $280.01 is NOT the average price of the service I had complete. I refuse to believe that $280.01 is even the national average. Working with Guard is extremely frustrating. Guard also told me that homeowners should only use their home warranty 2x a year. That shows that they do not want to help their customers when they are in need of assistance. I am very disappointed with this company.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/17/2025

  ******,
  
  We understand your frustration and sincerely apologize for any inconvenience. Upon reviewing your ticket, we did not find a request for plumber recommendations. We would have been happy to provide a list of contractors that other customers have used. In the future, please dont hesitate to request contractor suggestions, and we will gladly share that information.
  
  While we strive to align with the technicians pricing, we do not always match what the technician charges. Our claims department determines a reasonable allowance based on the scope of the repairin this case, the snaking of your sink drain.
  
  We believe we have fulfilled the obligations outlined in our contract and, as a gesture of goodwill, have offered a $95 service fee coupon for your next approved claim.
  
  Best regards,

  Claims team

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/21/2025

   
  Complaint: 22817472
  
  I am rejecting this response because: Initially Guard told me that the reimbursement prices are based on the national average price of the repair.  Now they are stating that their claims department determines a reasonable allowance based on the scope of the repair.  Why is the story changing?  Most of the complaints against this company (BBB and ****** reviews) verify that they do not want to reimburse their customers.  Reimbursing me $280.01 when I paid $700 is absurd.  They can keep their coupon,  I will NOT be using these scammers again.  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** D

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/22/2025

  ******, 

  Let us escalate your claim once again and see if we can do anything additional for you. We are sorry that you are in this situation. Since we don't control contractor cost, when a contractor wants to charge significantly above averages we are put in a tough spot. We will reach out via your claim ticket. 

  Thanks, 

  Guard Home Warranty Claims

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/23/2025

   
  Complaint: 22817472
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I have received correspondence from the business via email.  They stated that they will reimburse me more than $280.01.  I will wait for them to follow through to accept the response.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** D

• Initial Complaint

  Date:12/29/2024

  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.

  We have a home insurance policy. Our microwave died 12/13/24. Per our policy requirements, we hired an independent contractor to assess the cause of the problem. He stated that it was a common issue with the diode, capacitor, and likely the magnetron. We dialed in the insurance agent to have the contractor describe the problem. When he tried to give a technical explanation, the agent essentially told him to speak in laymen terms (total estimate for repair was $770.86). The agent deliberately misconstrued his explanation, suggested that the diode broke, which led to 'secondary damage' which was not covered, leading them to only cover $94.26 for the diode (Response 1). This price was determined by their own 'independent' 3rd party partner. We disputed, to which they came back with an approved amount of $191.98, adding the capacitor (Response 2). Given labor is a flat rate (regardless of how many components are replaced), we escalated again, to which they declined (Response 3). They refused to give a cost breakdown, or any information associated with their contractor. They clearly have an established relationship with this 'partner', negating any possibility of an independent, impartial quote. This is misleading to consumers. Why should we waste time and money having a contractor diagnose the issue if they won't cover the true costs required. We've been without a microwave since Dec 17th and wasted hours disputing, researching, and communicating back and forth. They are clearly using self-serving verbiage in the contract detracting from the intent which is to remediate a broken appliance. We want the $770.86 which was quoted by an ACTUAL independent 3rd party. Their proposed resolution was to waive the $95 'service call fee' if we have another claim, but we would like it waived now, given the amount of time we've wasted just trying to get fair service. Our microwave broke, it was insured, we want it fixed without having to beg and plead for every last cent.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/14/2025

  Dear ******,
  
  Sorry for the delay in our response. Our pricing is determined based on the information provided by the technician. In this case, the technician confirmedon a recorded linethat the magnetron in your microwave failed as a result of the diodes failure. According to the terms of our contract, we do not cover secondary damages. We cover the component that initially failed, which in this instance is the diode. Additionally, we included coverage for the capacitor and the labor required for the repair.
  
  As a courtesy, we also offered a service fee coupon to waive our $95 service fee on your next approved claim.
  
  We believe our resolution aligns with the terms of our contract, and we hope this explanation clarifies our policy. Please let us know if you have any further questions.
  
  Best regards,

  Claims team

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/20/2025

   
  Complaint: 22743201
  
  I am rejecting this response because: the labor fee for a microwave repair is a flat rate, regardless of what components are being covered by insurance.  The labor fee was 415.00.  Please cover the labor as you say you will in your latest response.  

  Additionally, I would like to point out for future potential victims of your services that in microwave repairs, it is impossible to pinpoint what fails first as all three components work so simultaneously together.  It is also deemed unsafe to test the magnetron and therefore reliable repair companies recommend replacing all three as one unit- especially since the labor cost is the bulk of the cost, no matter what you are replacing.  ************ intentionally coerced a statement from our technician in order to fit their self-serving interpretation of the contract, and other consumers should be wary of how their technician is communicating any issue to these representatives. 

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *****

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/21/2025

  Dear ******,
  
  Regarding your concern, technicians may charge either a flat rate for labor or an hourly rate. We account for the labor hours as indicated by the technician, and our claims department relies on a third-party company to determine a fair and reasonable labor time. In the future, we offer to cover a service fee for a second opinion as well. 
  
  A manager has thoroughly reviewed the call with your technician and confirmed that no coercion occurred during the conversation. The technician clearly explained that the magnetron failure in your microwave was caused by the diode failure. As outlined in our service agreement, we do not cover secondary damages.
  
  For your reference, please review Section D.13 of our service agreement:
  D. THE FOLLOWING ARE CONSIDERED STANDARD EXCLUSIONS:
  13. Consequential, incidental, secondary, indirect, or punitive damages ()
  
  We believe we have fulfilled our contractual obligations regarding this claim. However, we would be happy to provide you with a service fee coupon for your next approved claim.
  
  Best regards,

  Guard Home Warranty Claims

  Customer Answer

  Date: 01/25/2025

   
  Complaint: 22743201
  
  I am rejecting this response because: you required us to hire a repair company to give a diagnosis and a price.  Every repair company that we have spoken to charges a flat rate above $400.  We understand that you have a third-party company to determine a fair and reasonable labor time, however, we could not find a repair company who would do it for as little as your third party company.  Please provide your third party companys information so that we can consider hiring them in the future.  If you are not able to provide us with their information, it leads us to believe that either your third party is outdated in terms of cost of labor in 2025 or the numbers were fabricated.  I would like to reiterate our point from our initial complaint.  They (Home Guard) clearly have an established relationship with this 'partner', negating any possibility of an independent, impartial quote. This is misleading to consumers. Why should we waste time and money having a contractor diagnose the issue if they won't cover the true costs required.  This is why we are writing to the BBB.
  
  We understand your motive for offering us compensation for future needs, seeing as our contract is ending soon and there is a high chance that we will not need it.  This is performative and unacceptable to us.  If you would like to offer us the same compensation for this current claim, we would be willing to consider this.  

  We also understand your motive for supporting your call person, however, we would also like to point out that the wording of your contract is contradictory to the intent of the contract. We purchased this warranty program for peace of mind when buying an older home thinking that if something breaks unexpectedly, we would not be financially burdened by the repair.  We trust that if your company is ethical, that you will cover the actual costs that were incurred to repair our microwave, as is the point of your company.  We would like to reiterate that our repair technician was trying to educate your call person on how electronic components interact, but that the actual damage was caused by a singular event. Further, based on our experience thus far, it would be hard to believe your manager's review of the call is impartial. If it would be helpful, we could get a signed statement from our technician re-explaining his professional opinion.

  Lastly, my name is ******. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:11/04/2024

  Type:Service or Repair 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.

  Guard Home Warranty - Deceptive and Unreliable We took out an $800 per year policy with Guard Home Warranty for peace of mind when purchasing our new home. We believed that their coverage would protect us from unexpected issues, but our experience with them has been incredibly disappointing and a complete waste of time and money.Shortly after moving in, we discovered our washing machine was leaking. Thinking this would be a simple claim, we contacted Guard, only to be told wed need to find a repair service, get a quote, and then submit it for approval. Living in a rural area with our closest small town over 20 minutes away, finding local options was challenging. When we asked for approved repair providers, Guard gave us a small list of companiesall over an hour away and unwilling to service our location.After a lot of effort, we finally found a repair company that agreed to visit, though it cost us $149 just for the service call. After inspecting the washer, the technician quoted a repair cost of about $350. We promptly submitted all required information to Guard Home Warranty, hoping theyd quickly approve the ********* our frustration, Guard Home Warranty refused to cover the repair, leaving us with a policy that didnt live up to its promises. We appealed that decision and were again denied the covered repair cost. Their lack of support and unwillingness to honor our claim is a complete scam. We expected a home warranty to provide dependable protection, but instead, we received no help.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 11/06/2024

  We are glad that we were able to speak with you and work through your concerns. We hope you are satisfied with the resolution of paying out the line item limit allowed for your washing machine.Your reimbursement has been processed and your check is in the mail. Thank you for taking the time to speak with us so that we can better understand your situation!

  Guard Home Warranty