"Warranty Gold" Claims

1252628303135

Comments

  • nowarrantynowarranty Member Posts: 66
    Im also looking for the source of that so if you find it, please post it here (I'll do the same if I find it). I remember reading an article but it didn't give details about National Warranty warning WG - just a one sentence note saying it was possible they were warned. I will check my printouts tonight and maybe the reporter/publication of that article would be of help.
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    Can a moderator/administrator please explain why the change in Forum Policy in regards to people asking about a Class Action Suit?

    Back in late Oct. (ref. my post #1234), it seemed the only objection was to posting any attorney's name, phone number and or email address. However, it was deemed acceptable to ask for someone to contact you outside of the forum, via email directly or via email through the Edmunds profile. But today I noticed that now, you are not allowing anything of this sort. While I can see some reason behind not having an attorney's info about any suit on the forum, (could be construed as endorsing said attorney or could make Edmunds a party in action by Warranty Gold, etc.), I cannot understand why you would not allow one member to ask that if another member has such info, would they please send it via other means besides actually posting it on the forum.

    From this change in your stance, it "appears" that Edmunds is doing everything it can to hinder it's member who have been victimized by Warranty Gold, and just want to share or obtain information.
  • kgtgkgtg Member Posts: 1
    Guys,
    What is the case number to be entered on the claim form?
    Section 1: Goods Sold to be checked?

    Thanks,
    KG
  • nowarrantynowarranty Member Posts: 66
    Thanks for posting this!
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    i believe, is 03-15721.

    As far as this thing going to the courts - I don't have any faith right now because there is no Trustee assigned to the case. WG is handling everything by ITSELF.

    We can file a motion to have a Trustee appointed, but I can't find a form online to do this. I called the local bankruptcy court and they said their online forms were for the debtor - that the creditors had to draw up their own.
  • jiharrisjiharris Member Posts: 2
    WG is acting, most likely, as a "debtor in possession." That means, in the context of a chapter 11 proceeding, that the court lets the fox remain in charge of the hen house until such time as one or more creditors demonstrate that there is good cause to replace the "fox" with a court appointed fiduciary. Part of the theory being that the "Fox" - while supervised - can more efficiently run its business with a view towards reorganization.

    The comments that all of the pre-June contracts have to be honored or refunded in order to reorganize is, I believe, incorrect. Under a Chapter 11, a debtor can unilaterally terminate certain classes of contracts. A debtor can also treat old creditors (we contract holders are considered unsecured creditors) as one class (for which there is a reduced recovery if any) and then continue to operate treating other customers (post-June 03) as if there were no bankruptcy. Frankly, there is every likelihood that the administrative and legal expenses of the Chapter 11 (including litigation costs with National Warranty) will consume much if not a substantial portion of the "estate" from which pre-June contract holders might be reimbursed for claims or paid pro-rata shares on their now terminated contracts.

    File your claims on time. Consider whether we should band together to investigate the issue of whether WG committed fraud by selling contracts on promises and assurances of financial safety once it knew or should have known of financial problems with National Warranty. If those facts can be proven, WG and its officers may be denied bankruptcy relief on the grounds of fraud.
  • yespadsyespads Member Posts: 8
    After looking at the many postings here, finally I lost the hope to see some money back from WG.

    I agree with Posting #1445 that we should band together to have a trustee on this case.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    Here's a link to a December 1st Warranty Week article that really makes me wonder what sort of company Warranty Gold really is, and whether we'll ever see a penny in refunds.

    http://www.warrantyweek.com/archive/ww20031201.html

    This saga gets more disgusting every day. And to think, for a mere $221.00 more I could have gotten a Chrysler Service Contract that would have always been worth something.

    The one thing I've learned from all the research I've done since NWIG's collapse is to either put money away for repairs, or spend more and go with a dealer/manufacturer-based contract. I will NEVER buy another internet-based service contract. I wish we could warn the world!

    To bad it's all hindsight.
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
    Several members were blatantly abusing the Member Agreement policy regarding solicitation/promotion. There were instances of members reposting the same message immediately after it was deleted for policy violation. The MA is very explicit regarding the promotion of other forums as well as soliciting goods, services, and/or actions by others. In addition, because Edmunds.com, Inc. holds the copyright of Edmunds.com web content, we have no way of verifying the accuracy or intent of things such as contact information of private infividuals and attorneys. In addition, intentional slanderous content in a post is also against the agreement and will not be tolerated.

    Thus, management adopted a strict enforcement policy in this discussion (the red message at the top), and the hosts are being careful to enfoirce these rules without stifling anyone's desire to communicate their feelings or ask questions. For those who do wish to cintact each other as far as information that we do not allow, we ask that you simply email the person using the email address in their profile - profiles are accessible by clicking the member's screen name in any of their posts.

    As I have stated several times since this whole thing broke in June, we understand the frustrations of Warranty Gold customers who have come here to discuss the situation. However, we can't allow separate rules to apply because of that frustration. All Town Hall rules apply in all TH discussions, and this one is no exception. And as I stated in the beginning of this post, there were those who chose to challenge authority in such a way to become a detriment to Town Hall.

    If any member has further questions regarding TH policy here or anywhere else, please don't hesitate to contact myself, Car_man, or Sylvia (Town Hall manager):

    kcram@edmunds.com
    car_man@edmunds.com
    sylvia@edmunds.com

    kcram
    Host
    Smart Shopper and FWI Message Boards
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    Check out the 5th paragraph in this article. As of 21 Nov 2003, less than 2 weeks ago, Warranty Gold has alreay stated there won't be any money to pay unsecured creditors (that's means policy holders like us hoping for a partial refund or claim payment.)

    The bad thing is that they have enough assets to cover the refunds, but they're trying to get out of having to use them by rejecting our contracts. I still think our best bet is to file a written objection to the rejection order by December 8th. If enough people object, the court may order them to come up with a different plan (such as using their assets, that they acquired with OUR money, to pay us back!)

    http://www.washtimes.com/autoweekend/20031119-115759-2808r.htm
  • timcliffordtimclifford Member Posts: 4
    Hello again!

    I agree with both of the posters (below). If anyone knows how to do that please proceed.

    Had the insurance "industry rating" (independently checked by me) on Warranty Gold not been A- or higher when I bought my policy I wouldn't even have thought about going with Warranty Gold. Had Warranty Gold not had a flawless Better Business resolution record I would also have said "ix nay."

    Sometimes, despite our best "due diligence" we get screwed. I feel I got "taken" by Warranty Gold but you know it happens and there are bigger things in life to "worry about."

    Like you all I am aggressively pursuing as much of a refund as I can get. Because of unexpected changes in my car's usage I was still covered by original factory warranty when I got that surprise Warranty Gold "sorry buddy" e-mail! Talk about feeling really screwed and stupid!

    Tim

    #1446 of 1449 Lost trust now by yespads Dec 02, 2003 (7:43 pm)
    After looking at the many postings here, finally I lost the hope to see some money back from WG.

    I agree with Posting #1445 that we should band together to have a trustee on this case.
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    on 12/01/03. I believe Global Payment Services is a Credit Card payment processing service.

    WG states "..Global Payment Systems has accumulated over $650,000 in funds rightfully belonging to the Debtor."

    I love that part "...RIGHTFULLY BELONGING TO THE DEBTOR".

    WG is saying Global Payment Systems violated the Automatic Stay - meaning creditors(etc...) can't begin/pursue lawsuits, collection calls, repossesiions, garnishments or levies.

    I have WG's motion for an expedited hearing. plz email me if anyone wants it.
  • joboo1joboo1 Member Posts: 75
    can anyone tell me how to go about asking the courts to deny WG the protection of bankkruptcy. Is it just a letter to the court or is there a form letter?

    Thanks
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    Mods - thanks for the explanation and at least still allowing someone to contact another member via the member's profile email.

    robphelan - The courts, if they decide this money does belong to WG, ought to seize that and have a third party begin paying claims and issuing refunds on a first-in, first-out basis.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    I finally got a copy of the court order allowing WG to reject our contracts. To my untrained legal eye, it looks like the judge agrees that WG should "dump" it's NWIG-backed contracts so it can press on with business. I'm Disgusted!

    If you don't object now, you'll deserve "what you WON'T have coming to you!" As I've stated before, I think bankruptcy is the answer, but I don't think allowing WG to reject our contracts is the best "plan" to get a refund. From everything I've read, if WG is successful in rejecting our contracts, they will be ahead of the game, and we'll get zero, nadda, nothing!

    Think about it: you see what sitting back relying on WG to do the right thing has gotten us so far. Surely we're not naive enough to allow them to steer US through THEIR bankruptcy. I honestly believe if we can't mount a credible objection to WG rejecting our contracts, we will get absolutely nothing...ZERO. We must force WG to use the assets we funded for them to pay us back...or to go out of business trying!

    Folks, if you don't send in written objections by December 8th, which basically means within the next 48 hours, you'll have no one to blame but yourself for getting a zero refund or a "claim terminally denied" notice, or both.

    =================================================================- - - - - ========================================

    IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
    OF THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    AUSTIN DIVISION
    IN RE: §
    §
    WARRANTY GOLD, LTD., § CASE NO. 03-15721
    § CHAPTER 11
    DEBTOR § JUDGE FRANK MONROE
    ORDER GRANTING WARRANTY GOLD’S FIRST DAY MOTION TO REJECT ALL
    PRE-JUNE 7, 2003 CUSTOMER EXTENDED WARRANTY CONTRACTS AND TO
    MODIFY AND EXTEND RESPONSE DEADLINE
    On November 12, 2003, the Court considered the First Day Motion To Reject All Pre-
    June 7, 2003 Customer Extended Warranty Contracts And To Modify And Extend Response
    Deadline (“Motion”) filed by Warranty Gold, Ltd. (the "Debtor"), the Debtor-In-Possession in
    this Case.
    The Court finds that the modified response deadlines set forth below must be used to
    provide adequate notice of the Motion and this Order as there are approximately 67,000 of these
    contracts.
    The Court finds that rejection of the Debtor’s Pre-June 7, 2003 Customer Extended
    Warranty Contracts (“Pre-June 7 Contracts”) is warranted under the circumstances in that the
    IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED and DECREED that the
    below described is SO ORDERED.
    Dated: November 19, 2003
    ________________________________________
    FRANK R. MONROE
    UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
    ____________________________________________________________
    2
    Debtor has determined, through the exercise of its best business judgment, that the Pre-June 7
    Contracts are not necessary to the Debtor’s current operations, that the assumption of the Pre-
    June 7 Contracts is an economic impossibility in that the Debtor cannot cure the past defaults and
    cannot provide adequate assurance of future performance, and that the assumption of the Pre-
    June 7 Contracts do not enhance the prospects for a successful reorganization of the Debtor.
    Therefore, rejection of the Pre-June 7 Contracts is appropriate and in the best interests of the
    Debtor, its estate and the creditors.
    THEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the Motion effective November 12, 2003.
    The Pre-June 7 Contracts are immediately rejected under Bankruptcy Code § 365(a).
    However, to protect the due process rights of the customers under the Pre-June Contracts,
    the Court expands the finality period under Bankruptcy Rule 8001 from ten days to twenty- five
    days to allow such customers to review and respond to this Order approving the rejection of the
    Pre-June 7 Contracts. Further, the Court modifies the filing requirements in Rule 8001 to allow a
    response filed to this Motion to act as a motion for new trial if filed within the 25-day period,
    such that a response will generate a hearing on the Motion. This extension is intended to
    correlate to the 20-negative notice provisions in the Local Rules of the Western District of Texas,
    while allowing the rejection to be effective immediately.
    The Court orders the Debtor to notify all customers under the Pre-June 7 Contracts by
    verified email addresses of the entry of the order approving the rejection of such Contracts. The
    Debtor is instructed to notify these holders at the email addresses held by the Debtor of the order
    approving rejection and, in the email, set forth the method by which the holder may respond. As
    to the remaining holders whose email address cannot be verified, the Debtor is instructed to
    contact such holders using first class mail. The notice to the customers must be in a form similar
    3
    to the form attached as Exhibit 1. Notification must be sent out by Friday, November 14, 2003.
    Notification may accompany the notification of the debtor’s first meeting of creditors.
    The Court further orders that any party objecting to this Order must send a written
    objection on or before December 8, 2003 to Debtor’s counsel at:
    Lynn Hamilton Butler
    Porter Rogers Dahlman & Gordon
    P. O. Box 2227
    Austin, TX 78746
    (512) 505-5900
    Fax (512) 472-7316
    reorganization@warrantygold.com
    Objections to this Order are not to be filed with the Court.
    The Court further orders that a status hearing on responses filed with counsel will be held
    on December 23, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. at the Homer Thornberry Judicial Building, 903 San Jacinto,
    Bankruptcy Courtroom No. 1, Austin, Texas 78701. It will not be necessary for objecting or
    responding parties to be at the December 23, 2003 status conference as no rights will be
    determined at this time. The only issues to be decided will be the procedure by which such
    objections or responses can be scheduled for hearing and the time for filing claims resulting from
    rejection of the Pre-June 7 Contracts.
    ###
    Order submitted,
    PORTER ROGERS DAHLMAN
    & GORDON
    By: /s/ Lynn Hamilton Butler
    Lynn Hamilton Butler
    Texas State Bar No. 03527350
    2600 Via Fortuna, Suite 130
    Austin, TX 78746
    Telephone: (512) 505-5900
    Fax: (512) 472-7316
    lbutler@prdg.com
    ATTORNEY FOR WARRANTY GOLD, LTD.
    4
    EXHIBIT 1
    FORM OF NOTICE REGARDING REJECTION ORDER
    NOTE TO ALL HOLDERS OF CONTRACTS SOLD PRIOR TO JUNE 7, 2003:
    ON NOVEMBER 12, 2003, THE BANKRUPTCY COURT ENTERED AN ORDER AT
    THE DEBTOR’S REQUEST REJECTING ALL EXTENDED WARRANTY
    CONTRACTS SOLD BY WARRANTY GOLD PRIOR TO JUNE 7, 2003. IF YOU WISH
    TO REQUEST A COPY OF THIS ORDER, YOU MAY DO SO BY EMAILING
    REORGANIZATION@WARRANTYGOLD.COM. TO FILE AN OBJECTION TO THIS
    ORDER, YOU MUST FILE THE OBJECTION IN WRITING WITH THE ATTORNEY
    FOR THE DEBTOR LISTED ABOVE BY DECEMBER 8, 2002. DO NOT FILE THE
    OBJECTION WITH THE BANKRUPTCY COURT. A STATUS HEARING ON
    RESPONSES/OBJECTIONS TO THIS ORDER WILL BE HELD ON DECEMBER 23,
    2003 AT 1:30 P.M. IN BANKRUPTCY COURTROOM #1, HOMER THORNBERRY
    JUDICIAL BUILDING, 903 SAN JACINTO, AUSTIN, TEXAS
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    When those of us caught up in this fiasco purchased our contracts, WG had all these claims about how they would be there and would back people contracts, etc. Now they're pulling this scam and just trying to dump us. I sent another letter to their CEO, Walter Kammerman, yesterday. Here it is:
    ********************
    It has been over two and a half long months since I wrote to you about obtaining a refund and got an initial reply from Ashley Taylor, Customer Service Manager. This delay is inexcusable. I demand immediate payment of the portion of my contract which I paid, $849.00. You continue to take in revenue, as you are still selling contracts. Therefore, some of those funds can be used to pay my refund. I choose Warranty Gold because I thought you would stand behind your contract, no matter what. But since this whole debacle broke loose, you have done nothing but pass the buck and point fingers. You are now trying to remove the burden of these unpaid claims and refunds by filing Chapter 11. Funny, when this started, you tried to say that Warranty Gold was not the responsible party for these debts. If that were true, why would you then file Chapter 11 over these same exact debts? I cancelled fairly early on in this process, July 17, 2003, long before you got the Bankruptcy Court involved, and therefore, I am entitled to my refund.
    **********************
    The reason I post it here, is to draw particular attention to the point I made about at first they tried to say it wasn't their responsibility, but NWIG's. Well if that were true, why the heck are they filing bankruptcy over it. Obviously because they are responsible. Further, if they really wanted to demonstrate good faith and try to prove that they are reputable, then they ought to take care of the customers who got caught up in the whole NWIG fiasco. Look, I am not against them staying in business. Just take a percentage of your monthly profits and use them to start paying peoples claims and refunds, on a first-in, first-out basis. At least if they did that, and told everyone they intended to pay all legitimate claims and refunds, people wouldn't mind as much if it took several months or more to get to them.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    Check out the following link by Lycos promoting WG. I sent Lycos a long e-mail last night asking them to remove WG from their site. I included several links to bankruptcy articles that showcase the type of company WG really is.

    http://www.warrantygold.com/lycos/wg_fs.asp?URL=quoteform.asp
  • mikefm58mikefm58 Member Posts: 2,882
    I just sent my objection to WG's request to stop honoring contracts sold prior to June 7, 2003. I didn't go into much detail, just stated that they should at least honor a pro-rated cancelled contract refund effective that date.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    You can now view all of the court pleadings to date if you go to the NEWS section at http://www.warrantynews.com and click on the December 4th update.

    Here's a link for those of us who have either sought or gotten credit card charge backs. WG is going after the company to get back $657,023.79 of our money that it says belongs to them. They also want $2000.00 for attorney fees. What a charade!

    http://www.warrantynews.com/docs/pleadings/12-1-03%20mtn%20for%20- contempt%20and%20tro.pdf

    I would almost bet they waited until the last minute to post these proccedings so that people can't complain that they didn't get a copy of the order cancelling our contracts (the order that's up for objection). Slick.
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    I emailed the Reorg on 12/03/03 about why they haven't put a single document online as was indicated in the Court Order.

    It seems they are not willing to do anything without being spurred to do so.
  • dave2407dave2407 Member Posts: 4
    I just called DC. According to Jason in the "Disputes" Dept., my 3 Dec 2003 dispute deadline has passed and DC has fully and permantly refunded my entire purchase premium ($1689). What a present that is. WG is out of my life. Good luck to all other CC disputes. DC forever has my business.
    Dave
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    Looks like the TX Dept of Licensing along with the Tx Attorney General's office is fighting for us.

    WG has posted a motion filed by the Tx AG office to exempt Texas customers from the First Day Rejection Order.

    "The Debtor agreed that it would effectively withdraw its request for rejection of any contracts sodl to Texas residents (without prjudice to filing any future request for such treatment)... As such, the Debtor ad the State file this joint request to amend and supplement the First Day Rejection Order to cover all contracts with consumers and customers, sace and except thosesold to Texas residents."

    here's the link
    http://www.warrantynews.com/docs/pleadings/12-1-03%20agreed%20mtn- %20to%20amend%20order%20rejecting.pdf

    This could be the start of seothing good - at least for some of us... Send this motion to your Attorney General for review to see if they can do anything similar.
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    that states we should still file a proof of claim and hope for the best.

    http://www.license.state.tx.us/warrantygold.htm
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    "TDLR is currently pursuing administrative action to revoke Warranty Gold’s registration. If the registration is revoked, Warranty Gold will no longer be authorized to sell new service contracts in the State of Texas."

    I hope this happens and I hope a lot more states follow suit. If WG will not take care of their customers, then they should get the shaft!!!!!!

    I can't believe the nerve of WG to sue the credit processing company for giving customers that WG screwed, 'chargebacks'!!!!!
  • nowarrantynowarranty Member Posts: 66
    Really, this is the company that continued charging credit cards in June, July, heck up until their bankruptcy! KNOWING it would not honor the contracts!

    WG is no better than the typical SCAMMER who makes absolutley false promises to mislead consumers but instead of pulling up stakes and starting in a new town once the scam is blown, WG gets to hide behind the Internet and the Laws of bankruptcy allowing them to continue their scam.
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    Let's hope other states start shutting them down as well. If too many states do not let them sell products, they'd be in a hurt, big time, as far as staying in business.

    If we could get California, New York, and Florida to follow suit, I think that would put the big dent in there revenues.
  • nowarrantynowarranty Member Posts: 66
    Unfortunately any people who foolishly purchased contracts after June 6th and THINK WG is going to be around to honor those contracts in 5 YEARS are in for a rude awakening between the bad publicity, and hopefully state's refusing to allow them to sell these RISKY policies. Mine lasted 3 MONTHS and I am out $1100.00 to WG PLUS so far $300 in a should-have-been COVERED Repair I paid for myself. This company HAS to DEPEND on FUTURE contracts to keep their current contract repairs paid since they obviously did not keep enough alleged "reserve" monies available as NWIC warned them in 2002. And when NEW contracts are no longer sold, those contracts sold after June 6th will be as worthless as those sold before June 6th. I hope those people pay attention to the news and message boards and consumer complaint boards and CANCELL contracts before they lose all of their money. Unless of course they are entitled to one of those laughable PRO-RATED refunds which are all but eaten up by the first 36K miles you never had the WG contract.
  • quigonjohnquigonjohn Member Posts: 77
    Well, maybe they'll be really lucky and the Administrator who they have will remain solvent and they'll actually get the term they paid for and be able to get their claims paid. My first extended warranty was on a 95 Cavalier I bought in 96. It was a steal, under $400 and I got well over $2000 worth of claims paid. The thing is, like was mentioned in one of the articles here in this WG thread, my Administrator changed at least once, maybe twice, but the claims handling was just shifted to a different company and my claims were still paid, and the shift was almost seamless. The way this whole NWIG & WG issue has been handled is going to do serious damge to the entire warranty industry. I am somewhat fortunate that all I have lost with Warranty Gold, at this point, is $749. ($399 down, 3 payments of $150 before I found out what was happening). That comes to $849, but I got $100 from them due to 2 referrals I made, (which at the time I made the referrals I had thought WG was going to be great, pre-June). In June I got a payment holiday from WG, but when they would not do the same in July, I had to pay or cancel, I cancelled. Now I just hope to get back all or some of the remaining amount.
  • rainman168rainman168 Member Posts: 5
    What did you do to recover all your money from Discover? I sent a letter and disputed my claims and DC says they only have one transaction from WG which will be a permanent credit. They have no other records of it. Since that account is no longer active, I can't access it on the website anymore. Can you give me Jason's number at DC? Thanks in advance.
  • jennyk4jennyk4 Member Posts: 38
    Mathematically is an impossible figure for chargeback credits. If 65,000 people received chargebacks, that would mean $10,000 per person. And we all know that 65,000 victims have not received credits, let alone $10,000 credits.
    Global is also holding funds received from new contracts and not releasing to their merchant account. So this figure indicates the magnitude of new contracts they have sold, and Global has not released to their merchant account due to the controversy and mass publication of WG's fraudulent business practices.
    What goes around, comes around!
  • rayt2rayt2 Member Posts: 1,208
    Dave, In case Jason @ Discover Card didn't mention to you, technically DC has a full 90 days to respond. DC credits your account after 30 but it can still be challenged within the 90 days.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    Here's the link to the online and mail in complaint forms for those of us in Florida. Please send one in and help me try to get our AG actively participating like the Texas AG is.

    http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/4492D797DC0BD92F85256CB80055F- B97/60FD9BD8FA71A5B185256CD1005EE5C5?OpenDocument
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    The link below is a news release ordering Warranty Gold to cease operations in Florida

    http://www.fldfs.com/PressOffice/ViewMediaRelease.htm?ID=449
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    Below is a copy of a "service request" I sent to the Florida Dept of Financial Services Insurance Division. The site is not exactly user friendly, but I think it's worth the time of everyone in Florida to sign up for a password and submit a "service request" for help. Here's what I wrote:

    "I purchased an extended warranty/vehicle service contract from Warranty Gold on Aug 31, 2002. I now have reason to believe it was not licensed to do business in Florida at that time. If they weren't, is there anything you can do about it at this point?

    After filing Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Warranty Gold obtained an order allowing it to "reject" or cancel my contract. I have filed an objection to that order with the US Bankruptcy Court in Austin, Texas. I've also filed a claim with the court.

    The Texas Dept of Insurance is aggressively pursiung Warranty Gold. What can/is the Florida DFS Insurance Division doing on behalf of me and other Floridians involved in this fiasco? Are you working with your Texas counterparts? Is there a particular strategy you are deploying to help us in Florida? What can I do to further protect myself and get help from your office?

    I read in your Nov 25, 2003 media release that you ordered Warranty Gold to notify all Florida policyholders that you ordered it to cease operations in Florida. For your information, Warranty Gold has not notified me."

    Here's the link to the Florida site. Click on the "My Service Request" tab in the top right corner to proceed: http://servicepoint.fldfs.com/eService_enu/start.swe?SWECmd=Start
  • njlexusnjlexus Member Posts: 17
    Not sure if these would be the right forms to file, so I would appreciate anyone else's opinion.

    If they are the right ones, it will be yet another state to file a complaint to.

    NJ Division of Banking and Insurance
    http://www.state.nj.us/dobi/complain.pdf

    NJ Attorney General
    http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/ocp/ocpform.htm
  • ftpftp Member Posts: 16
    You are off on your $$$. 65000 charge backs would be approximately $10/person. It could also be 657 people receiving $1000 .... most likely somewhere in between the two.
  • takenbywg1takenbywg1 Member Posts: 17
    At the risk of starting WWIII and having the Texans here send a posse after me, I'm wondering how those of you from other states feel about WG rejecting all pre-June 7th contracts except those sold to Texas residents.

    I'm happy for the Texas contract holders, but I also wonder how detrimental this might eventually be to the rest of us. I firmly believe that if this motion is accepted, the Texas Attorney General and the Texas Dept of Licensing may eventually strong arm WG into reinstating/honoring/assuming the Texas contracts in return for WG keeping its Texas license.

    I think that would be great for the Texas contract holders, and it would be great to finally see some justice done in this crazy fiasco. And I can only hope the Florida Attorney General will eventually step up to the plate for us Floridians. HOWEVER, as I know WG, they will not assume/honor the Texas contracts without a reduction in assets, which means less money in the big kitty to pay claims and refunds to the rest of us.

    Consequently, I am seriously considering writing a "conditional objection" to this motion. I say "conditional" because I would only object to WG honoring the Texas contracts if it reduces the assets available to the rest of us by so much as one penny. If WG does not reject the Texas contracts and then eventually honors them for free, my objection would be withdrawn.

    What does the "rest of the world" think about this? I love Texas, and I wish everyone involved in this mess the best of luck, but I want my !@#$%^&! money back too!!! I want a full refund, not a refund minus what it costs to honor only the Texas contracts.

    Check out "reply from Lynn Butler, attorney for WG" on 5 Dec 03 at Rob Phelan's web site for more insight into this.
  • jennyk4jennyk4 Member Posts: 38
    I cannot believe I goofed so majorly in math (my strength). Thanks for the correction. I guess this whole mess has affected my cognitive skills!
  • plainsman1973plainsman1973 Member Posts: 8
    Well, I’m reluctant to post this just because as soon as I do things will go bad. :) But here may be some inspiration.

    About June/July 2002, I bought a Platinum 7/100 warranty for my 2001 vehicle. The warranty cost $999.00. I purchased this on a Visa card. (Evidently it was important too that the amount was < $1000 , I don&#146;t know why but that&#146;s what my wife says)

    The thing that makes this so cool is that I closed that credit card 6 months after I used it; so I disputed a charge to an inactive account.

    Even though I had canceled the card and this happened over a year ago I received about $850 back from the CC Company (they pro-rated the $999). I will have a check in my hot little hands by the end of next week. It may be important to note that I opened my dispute in Oct; before WG floated to the top of the bowl.

    I really can&#146;t say enough about how well Visa has protected me. I am a huge believer in CCs, I have only disputed about 4-5 things in my life but it&#146;s a life saver when you need it.

    Don&#146;t give up hope.
  • redline65redline65 Member Posts: 693
    I'm glad to see the TX AG and TX Dept. of Licensing and Regulation taking action against Warranty Gold. Looks like our complaint letters may have helped after all. I hope everyone here that doesn't live in Texas writes their state's AG to urge them to take action to prevent Warranty Gold from selling policies in your state until they make good on the "cancelled" policies.
  • q45manq45man Member Posts: 416
    The "alleged Ponzi scheme" that pretty much all extended service contract suppliers operate under comes to light when you review the liabilities.

    Even manufacturers policies lose money on average.

    NWIC outside auditors estimated that they would have to sell [have assigned to them] 12,500 NEW Policies every month as their claims plus overhead exceeded $12,500,000 per month [based on $1,000 per policy placed into escrow]. Many of the marketing companies [like WG and the 7 other members of the risk rentention group] escrowed much less than $1,000 per policy!!!!!!!!!

    Whenever your liabilties exceed your reserves by 3 times you miscalculated the pay out rate.

    Extended service contracts need to be priced at $3,000-$5,000 [5-8 cents per mile covered] to meet customer expectations that most things would be covered ----- plus to cover the costs of administration.

    Dealers [independent marketers] who sold these policies didn't have adequate legal advice since the contracts spells out that the seller has primary responsibility in the event of failure by the retention group or if the group runs out of reserves [which the seller decided the amount to be reserved].

    NWIC warned the sellers last year that they were not transferring enough reserves and that they should raise the prices of policies sold to cover the cost of claims.
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    contract holders.

    I would verify through the new administrator that they will pay if WG folds - as it looks like they will.

    And get it in writing or threaten to cancel.
  • hkrskhkrsk Member Posts: 2
    Here is a web address for the Maryland attorney general's complaint form. It's a pdf file to download and mail. Maybe if we let them know what the Texas AG has done,then Maryland residents might also get some intervention.
    http://www.oag.state.md.us/Forms/gen.pdf
  • 3960special3960special Member Posts: 2
    I do not know where you got your information that Texas residents who bought contracts before June of 2003 were having their contracts honored. I have paid out nearly $700 in repairs recently because Warranty Gold refused to honor my contract. I have written to the State of Texas, to my credit card company, to Warranty Gold, and have filed a claim with the bankruptcy attorney, as instructed. I have received nothing. So do not think that Texas contracts are being honored by Warranty Gold. They are not!!!!!
  • PAmanPAman Member Posts: 207
    If you read the 'pleadings' on the so-called warranty news (propoganda) Web site, and the AG Web site, the Texas AG has ASKED the bankruptcy court to force WG to honor the Texas contracts.

    Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the AG is threatening to pull the WG license to sell contracts in Texas. Considering that Texas is the largest market for SUVs and trucks for GM, Ford and Chrysler, this is no small threat to WG's ability to come out of bankruptcy court with the likelyhood of staying profitable. If they can't sell contracts in Texas, they loose a huge potential market. It's my understanding that they also can't sell in California because of specific language in their laws, not because of their bankruptcy proceedings. If they loose two of the most populous states in the country, WG has bigger problems. It sounds like the lawyers are huddled in a room somewhere in Austin, with the conversation going something like this: "OK, you honor the XX,000 contracts in effect in Texas right now until they run out, and we will let you sell new contracts starting tomorrow to the XX,000,000 people in Texas."

    If the Texas AG is sucessful, there will be a posting on their Web site or the WG propoganda Web site about it, with the heading of a decree or a court order. I hope this works, because I currently hold three of these worthless contracts.

    Joe
  • rayt2rayt2 Member Posts: 1,208
    seems like DC can dance also! Was told if I called back today the temp credit issued 11/2 would become permanent if by close of business yesterday WG had not responded. Well they didn't but still no permanent credit either. The DC rep stated she will inquire to the "disputes" dept. as to status of my request but I should remember that I filed after the 180 limit. More doublespeak if ya ask me. All I can say is if the credit gets issued I'm cancelling the card so they can't come back to me at a later date. I just don't trust DC either since the 5 reps I have spoken to all say different things.
    What's to say I cancel now with the temp credit already issued and no outstanding balance, they'll have no way to reinstate the charge if the account doesn't exist anymore....hmmmmmmmm! Any lawyers out there who can chime in on this thought??

    Ray T.
  • johnny967johnny967 Member Posts: 13
    My contract with this company is WGxxxxx. Had I been aware this company was unauthorized to sell contracts in the state of Florida, I would never have applied for a policy. I cancelled this policy on July 7, 2003 and told to expect a refund 6 weeks after. Not once did their customer service representative inform me of problems or bankruptcy with their administrator. All I was told was to expect it at or a bit after 6 weeks since they were backlogged with paperwork. After 8 weeks and no refund, they informed me of internal matters between them and the NWIG out of the Cayman Islands. To date, I have successfully received a $500.00 chargeback against warrantygold and still owed approx. $250.00 more. I would accept $750.00 as an agreed pro-rated refund for the cancelled contract but if they were unlicensed to do business in the state of Florida, this contract was never good to begin with and a full refund of the purchase is expected. This is no longer an issue of failing to refund a pro-rated contract but rather a breach of contract. They willfully & knowingly did business with a resident of a state they were never supposed
    to do business with in the first place. They may be protected by Chapter 11 bankruptcy but since the comments posted at http://www.fldfs.com/PressOffice/ViewMediaRelease.htm?ID=449 verify my concerns, I will file an ammended claim with the bankruptcy court for the full amount of the contract. I hope the Florida Attorney Generals office would agree with me. I also believe it is Warranty Golds intent to fight the chargeback due to Chapter 11 protection. They have stated numerous times that NWIG is the responsible party and customers should address inquiries to them. If that were the case, WG would not need to file for bankruptcy protection. While the prospect of a full refund is slim to none, I do hope the Fl. dept. of Fin. Services will enforce a ban upon WG to cease all business with State of Florida residents.
  • nowarrantynowarranty Member Posts: 66
    I think WG WAS licensed to do biz in FL under the WarrantyGold.com entity. Since then Anything (including the .com biz) from WG was supp to cease doing business in FL.

    As for chargebacks/WG disputing them -
    Be careful and stay on top of your credit card company - they failed to send me the WG response/dispute. Luckily I had called my CC company a week before the case was closed and was was shocked to be given THREE days to get my REPLY back to my credit card company despite it being their fault I never responded (they never told me OR even updated my account removing the Temp credits - just fell thru the cracks and I got an apology. Thanks. Here I thought WG didn't fight me!). It's not enough fighting with WG. I'll be soon fighting/cancelling my CC if they do not honor my entire dispute.

    And WG has the audacity to:
    A) claim my contract is in force and valid (despite PUBLIC records?!)
    B) Blame ME for not cancelling sooner when (DUH) they withheld a little info from me like they were NOT honoring my contract so how would I even KNOW to cancel? Gee, thanks WG, but do I really want to Cancel and NOT receive a refund anyway? WG makes that old saying about reading the FINE PRINT mandatory when doing business as you never know who will be deceptive and their Pro-Rated refunds back to zero miles insure you will get nothing back even if you just purchased the policy a few months prior.

    I can't wait till this mess is over. I hope I will not lose most of my money to these crooks on my 3 month old contract. Does the fair credit billing act of a limited X amount of days for a chargeback apply when a company blatantly swindles lies and cheats customers?
  • robphelanrobphelan Member Posts: 27
    has set up an email update list. If anything new comes up, they will mass notify whoever is on the list.

    Feel free to email me for the link.

    Also, there is a new doc on warrantynews.com/pleadings.asp that shows WG going after the cc companied and Global Payments - the biggest issue is that cc customers didn't file a timely complaint.

    The cc companies have asked Global Payment to put WG on a "match list" which blacklists them from ANY credit card transactions.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.