Complaints

This profile includes complaints for ASC Warranty, Inc.'s headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

ASC Warranty, Inc. has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  ASC Warranty, Inc.

  1793 Highway 201 N Mountain Home, AR 72653-2410

  
• 

  ASC Warranty, Inc.

  PO Box 2400 Mountain Home, AR 72654-2400

  

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

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/25/2025

  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.

  The warranty company is refusing to pay for the replacement of transmission due to neglect since it was low on fluid. However this particular vehicle has no way to check or be warned of these issues without a mechanic looking at it. Took to mechanic the instant I thought there may be an issue as I just bought this Jeep grand Cherokee 2014 9 months ago.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/25/2025

  The transmission cooler is leaking causing the transmission to be low on fluid and causing damage. The cooler nor the damaged caused by the leak are covered under the service agreement. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:08/01/2025

  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.

  I purchased a car last month and purchased the extended warranty coverage. The issue I’m having is I have a factory defect on my car that has damage. And will affects the safety of me driving my car. I attempted to file a claim . I was denied my claim due to them saying they don’t cover wheels etc. the issue stand that one paper states all the coverage I have plus the extra I had added. Then they are trying to place a paper saying they don’t cover these things. So this is fraud. They were so rude wouldn’t professionally listen and reason with my complaint. I need help bc I spent a lot of money for the coverage. If they don’t want to cover me I want to be reimbursed for the warranty I paid and go elsewhere. This is very bad business.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/01/2025

  Very misleading I feel that it is a scam and they are very unprofessional. If they want to deny a claim that they advertise for on blanket then try add a loop hole. I feel like I’d like to be refunded my money for there non service I would like to purchase a warranty else where.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/04/2025

  A cracked wheel would not be covered by the service agreement. You will need to check with your insurance company. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/29/2025

  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.

  I am filling a complaint against Route 66 Extended Warranty regarding lack of response to several attempts of communication and refusing to send written reply to a claim.
  On Monday 07/14/2025 my *** ***** ******* **** had a message in the dashboard "service shifter" and it wasn't able to move from park, therefore it was not drivable. We towed it to a shop and they filed the claim, after that, the shop called saying Route 66 was refusing to cover it. We called, and the supervisor gave us an email to send an appeal where they could "evaluate" our case and see if they could cover it. We sent the first email on 07/17/2025 with all the details of what needed to be replaced and why that affected the drivability of the vehicle directly, but got no response. We paid out of pocket because I needed the car for work, and the car was ready by Friday 07/18.
  We sent a follow up on Tuesday 07/22/2025. After getting no response for several days, we called today asking for an update to see if they even received our emails, and they confirmed over the phone that they did receive them. We asked for the explanation of denial to be sent to our email, and they refused, we asked for them to reply to the email saying that they received it and they refused. The only response they gave over the phone was that "nothing has changed". I asked for a written reply and they said "it won't make a difference". This conversation was with a supervisor, we asked for a higher up and they stated that "they don't receive phone calls".
  
  *I would like to add that at the time of purchase we added the "best" extended warranty option and we only received a basic flyer with the name of the warranty and phone number for claims. The tow service was a joke, Route 66 response: "they are a third party".
  
  I am requesting a refund on the service we received for my ***** ******* ****. Attached are a copy of the receipt, payment information, copy of first appeal email and copy of second appeal email.
  
  ***** ***** 

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/29/2025

  Sorry for any confusion. The parts listed on page 1 of the agreement are the parts covered. The shifter is not a listed part there for would have no coverage. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/29/2025

   
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Thank you for your response. However, it does not address the key concerns we have raised regarding the denial of our claim.

  
  While the contract lists certain covered parts on page 1, our claim concerns the failure of the rotary shifter assembly, which is a critical control component directly tied to the operation of the transmission—one of the listed covered parts. The shifter’s failure rendered our vehicle completely inoperable, effectively preventing use of a covered component.

  
  At the time of purchase, we were explicitly informed that this warranty provided bumper-to-bumper coverage and a full engine and drivetrain warranty. This created a reasonable expectation that critical control components such as the shifter assembly, essential to the drivetrain’s operation, would be covered under the plan. Denying coverage on the basis that the shifter is not explicitly listed contradicts these representations and consumer expectations.

  
  Additionally, our prior written communications sent on July 17 and July 23, which included detailed explanations and supporting documentation, were ignored. No written explanation for denial was provided to us, which raises serious concerns about transparency and customer service.

  
  In order to resolve this matter, please provide a detailed written explanation addressing:

  
  How the failure of the rotary shifter assembly does not fall within the coverage, given its essential role in operating a covered component (the transmission).

  
  Why the warranty’s sales representations regarding bumper-to-bumper coverage and full engine and drivetrain warranty do not apply in this case.

  
  Why our prior requests for claim review and reimbursement were not acknowledged or responded to in writing.

  
  We respectfully request a prompt and thorough response.

  Thank you for your attention to this matter.

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

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/29/2025

  The agreement list the parts that are covered under the coverage on page 1, then on page 2 there are exclusions THIS AGREEMENT DOES OT COVER if you look at 6. ANY PARTS NOT LISTED IN PARAGRAPH 1,... As far as what was told to you at time of purchase you would need to speak with them we can only go by what the agreement list. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/23/2025

  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.

  I am paying for a warranty and the transmission is clearly covered in paper work. Now that Charlies has quoted $6300 Route 66 only wants to cover $5000 of the repair. I am a single mom and $1300 is not easy to come up with. I am paying for something I deserve to be treated fairly

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/24/2025

  Sorry for any confusion.  The shop is charging more than we can cover on this repair the transmission is available and can be shipped for less. We are willing to authorize what the repair can be made for. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/24/2025

   
  
  Complaint: ********
   
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  I paid for a warranty that says nowhere that bc a repair is worth more than they want to pay that they don’t have to. I am out a lot of money with a vehicle I now can’t drive. Grow up and help a single mom out. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ********** **********

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/24/2025

  Under scope of agreement page 1 top. At the option of the Administrator, failed parts may be replaced with new, like kind or good quality remanufactured, used or after-market parts. The Administrator reserves the right to select the methods of repair and or repair facilities.  The offer made is reasonable for this repair and the repair can be made fort the offer.  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/16/2025

  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.

  On June 25th I had an accident in my Infinity QX56 and I call ASC to inform them and they immediately said I was not covered. I said you should cover the internal parts and they refused. I have **** and they took care of my accident. ASC was nasty and said they did not owe me any refund or service. I truly regret having paid my good hard earned money to them.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/21/2025

  Sorry for any confusion on the coverage, However damage from an accident would not fall under the coverage. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/16/2025

  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.

  ASC warranty florida license ***** is denying a warranty claim for my vehicle. I believe their description of parts not covered did not explain the parts not covered. The dealership advised the exhaust manifold needs to be replaced. They also told me this is an engine component. ASC is saying it's an exhaust part but they don't spell out on the paper I signed what is part of the exhaust. They refused to answer if they would replace an engine if an exhaust valve dropped into the engine. They would only say they won't replace the exhaust manifold because it has exhaust in the name. Other components they list in very specific detail that arent covered ie brake pads, rotors, radio. For the exhaust they only say exhaust parts. The policy also covers turbos which sit on the exhaust manifold. They should have spelled out what exhaust parts are. The dealership advised the exhaust system is after the exhaust manifold. When you buy an engine it comes with the exhaust manifold. Also they stated their coverage covers exhaust manifold because it's an engine component. The plan is a factory type warranty, ****** warrant would replace it. Their miss characterized their warranty to make it appear they included more coverage then they actually allow. This part should be replaced at the coverage I signed up for. Also I believe they aren't replacing it because the vehicle has had a couple parts replaced and they don't want to spent this amount because it'll be over then amount of money I paid for the warrant. Another example, the transmission cooler line broke, they covered the warrant, in the excluded parts they say hoses aren't covered. ASC should be very specific with valiantly what is included and excluded with the warranty. It is apparent they hand pick what they want to replace and if it's over they amount they want to pay they deny the claim.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/21/2025

  I am sorry for any confusion. However under items not covered it does state exhaust parts in the list. The part in question is the exhaust manifold, so we would be unable to help with this repair. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:07/08/2025

  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.

  I purchased a warranty from ASC...and I canceled within the first 30 day's which allows me a full refund, less 25 dollars cancellation fee.. The cancellation Procedure clearly states that ASC will process & refund me with in 30 day's.. They are trying to tell me the dealer were I bought the car is responsible for the refund. The contract states the dealer is responsible for repairs, not the refund..

  (See attached documentation.)

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/08/2025

  You will need to speak with the dealer you paid for the agreement. We were not paid prior to the agreement being unwound. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/08/2025

   
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: The ASC contract that I received when I purchased the car from Auto First. Clearly states the dealer elected to do all repairs and reimbursement for repairs. It said nothing about the dealer were responsible for refund of policy. The policy with ASC heading on the agreement. Clearly stated that I must submit all documents for cancelation to the Administrator of ASC, and that I would be charged a 25 dollar calculations fee and that my refund would be processed with in 30 days of cancelation, in full. This is all written in ASC agreement, it says nothing about the dealer will process and refund. Until that money is returned to the financial institution, the Lender of my car loan, ******* ***. According to the ASC agreement that I received when I purchase the car. ASC,must refund that money. And they must be held responsible until that money is returned.

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

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/09/2025

  I am sorry for any confusion on this ASC was not paid for the agreement you paid the dealer and cancelled prior to the dealer paying us so they still have the money. You will need to reach out to the dealer. The dealer made contact with us on 6/30/2025 to verify what he needed to do and was advised refund customer. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/09/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I hear what you are saying at ASC. But I can only relate to what the ASC contract that I have in black and white saids. It is what I received when I signed my loan. The ASC contract that is given to individuals when they purchase it, from what you say is misleading. It needs to be rewritten to clarify that if cancel within the first 30 days, the dealer is responsible for refund, not ASC. You state they were advised to refund on 6-30-25. When that money is returned to the Lender.I will inform all, that problem has been solved, case closed.

   

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

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/24/2025

  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.

  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  
  My name is ******* ******, and I am filing a complaint against Route 66 Extended Warranty regarding the mishandling and denial of a valid claim under my policy (*********) for my **** **** *****.
  
  In May 2024, my truck suffered a sudden engine seizure. I took it to ****** ****** in Utah, where the issue was confirmed. I submitted a claim to Route 66, expecting it to be covered under the terms of my warranty. However, Route 66 denied the claim, stating there were “not enough miles accrued to sustain the claim.” This reasoning is not stated anywhere in the warranty agreement as an exclusion or condition for denial, nor was it ever explained to me when I purchased the policy.
  
  The repair shop clearly communicated that the cause of the failure could not be determined without pulling the engine, a diagnostic step Route 66 refused to approve or pay for. Despite this, they implied the damage was pre-existing—without performing or authorizing the necessary inspection to make that determination.
  
  Since then, I have made multiple attempts to contact Route 66 by phone and email. Each time, I have either been ignored, delayed, or given vague responses. I believe this is a case of bad faith claims handling, and that Route 66 is intentionally avoiding responsibility for a legitimate repair claim.
  
  I respectfully request the BBB’s assistance in holding Route 66 accountable and helping me secure a fair resolution—either full compensation for the necessary engine repair or another form of restitution in accordance with my contract.
  
  Please feel free to contact me at:
  
  ******* ****** Email: ************************* Phone: ************
  
  Thank you for your time and assistance.
  
  Sincerely,
  ******* ****** 

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/29/2025

  On page 2 of your agreement under exclusions number 6 and 13 both deals with the reason for denial. It should be noted that the value your truck is low and under the agreement also on page 2 of the agreement Limits Of Liability The total of all repairs paid or payable shall not exceed $5,000, the ** ***** average trade in value or vehicle purchase price whichever is less at time of repair. Your truck has a $3,000 trade in value. Which would be the most we could go on repairs. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/30/2025

   
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  To whom it may concern,
  
  
  I appreciate Route 66 Warranty’s response, but I must respectfully disagree with their justification for denial.
  
  The engine failure was not confirmed to be pre-existing. The shop, ****** ******* stated a teardown was required to determine the cause of failure. Route 66 refused to authorize or pay for the teardown — then denied the claim based on “pre-existing failure” without any verified diagnosis. That is not a reasonable or fair application of the contract.
  
  Additionally, the original reason for denial I was given was “not enough miles driven” — a condition that is not listed anywhere in my warranty. Route 66 later shifted their explanation to Exclusions #6 and #13, which appears inconsistent and arbitrary.
  
  They also claim the truck’s trade-in value is only $3,000, and therefore the most they would pay. However:
  
  I purchased the truck for $10,500,
  I still owe $13,000 on the loan,
  And there has been no formal valuation provided to justify the $3,000 figure.
  
  This truck is not drivable, and I am left with a loan on a disabled vehicle due to a failure that should have been covered under the warranty.
  
  I am not requesting a refund.
  
  I am requesting that Route 66:
  
  Authorize the repair up to the $5,000 warranty liability cap,
  OR
  Declare the vehicle a total loss and reimburse the maximum value allowed under the warranty agreement.
  
  I paid for a warranty in good faith. It should either help fix the issue or fairly total out the truck — not leave me stuck with debt and no support.
  
  Thank you for your time and review.
  
  ******* ******
  Phone: ************
  Email: *************************
  
  
  
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/01/2025

  We are willing to allow you to unwind your agreement for a full refund of purchase price for agreement, please reach out to you CU to have them send request. Both 6 and 13 list preexisting as not being covered. The limit of liability is listed as the lessor of $5000 or ** ***** average trade in value,  Which is $3000.00. The total loss refers to a refund of the purchase price of the agreement if your insurance declares the truck a total loss. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 07/01/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  Thank you for Route 66’s response. I respectfully do not accept the offer to unwind the contract for a refund.
  
  I purchased this warranty to protect my vehicle in the event of a serious failure — not to be refunded after the fact. Route 66 denied my claim in a way that I believe was both unfair and inconsistent with the written agreement.
  
  My truck suffered a catastrophic engine failure. The repair shop, ****** ******, contacted Route 66 and was told that the teardown needed to determine failure would not be authorized or covered. As a result, Route 66 denied the claim without proper diagnosis.
  
  ****** ****** also provided a written note stating that Route 66 denied coverage because of the mileage on the truck. However, there is no minimum mileage requirement stated anywhere in my warranty contract. Later, Route 66 changed the denial reason to Exclusions 6 and 13 for pre-existing conditions. This inconsistency — switching from mileage to pre-existing failure — demonstrates a lack of good faith in handling my claim.
  
  Route 66 claims my truck is only worth $3,000, citing ** ***** trade-in value, but they’ve provided no documentation to support that number. I purchased the truck for $10,500 and still owe $13,000. This valuation seems arbitrary and unfair given the financial loss I’m facing.
  
  I am not seeking a refund. I am asking Route 66 to honor the contract by paying for the engine repair up to the $5,000 liability limit, or to total the vehicle if the repair cost exceeds the limit, as implied by the contract’s intent.
  
  Route 66 has not followed fair procedures, denied the claim without a full diagnostic evaluation, and has given shifting and unsupported reasons for denial. I am asking the BBB to continue pursuing this complaint so Route 66 can be held accountable to the terms of their agreement.
  
  
  ******* ******
  ************
  *************************
  
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/11/2025

  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.

  We bought an extended warranty for our 2017 Chevy Silverado through ASC. They have done a few minor repairs on the vehicle over the last two years with no problems. Last week our transmission went out on the truck along with a few other minor repairs that need to be serviced, because of the cost they sent out an adjuster. The adjuster denied our claim for service stating it has a six inch lift. It in fact has a three inch lift that was on the vehicle when we purchased it. No modifications have been made from date of purchase. They have no appeals department and they will not let you send in anyone for a second option. They use the adjuster they hired to deny claims. The adjuster never even looked at the lift kit on the truck it went solely off his opinion that a 3 inch lift kit they are calling a 6 inch kit caused transmission failure. The company they used is warranty Inspection Service. They will not give me in writing the reason for the denial of service, the underwriting department will not allow it. They will not allow me to get a second opinion. ******* and his supervisor ******* are the rudest people to work with. Stay away from this company. They provide a warranty on a vehicle they know they will never repair. If it is modified anyway from how it comes off the assembly line it is not covered. They are not even willing to pay any percentage towards the cost

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/11/2025

  The alterations made to the truck directly affect the parts that have failed. Per the terms of the agreement we would not be able to cover the repairs needed. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/12/2025

  
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  *** the dealership we bought the warranty from has even been in touch with you because they pay more monthly to you because they mostly sell lifted trucks. They have also asked you for a copy of the policy as have I and you refuse to give us one. If your policy is correct then why not supply one to the dealer and the customer? What about the MMWA act? You have  dealership and a repair shop telling you that the lift did not directly cause the transmission failure and you refuse to acknowledge that. How can two different mechanics telling you that your adjuster is wrong and you still stick to what your adjuster says. You are failing to provide a service we paid for because of the price even after we have agreed to use rebuilt parts and pay 25% of the bill. I think the supervisor over this claim will absolutely have your company in legal trouble because he refuses to let us speak to anyone else. Not to mention you are losing a dealership that sold your warranties for years. If you don’t think he will tell other dealerships not to you use you are wrong. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ***** ******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/13/2025

  The MMWA is for manufacturer warranties in this case ******* ****** and the factory warranty when purchased new. Suspension alterations cause premature failure of suspension steering and the drivetrain by causing extra stress on those parts. The transmission has to work harder to move the vehicle. The pictures taken by the inspector show 6" lift with spacers and wide tires. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:06/03/2025

  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.

  I am filing a complaint against Route 66 Extended Warranty regarding their improper denial of my claim for a transmission failure, which occurred in May '25. I purchased a 3-year extended warranty in August '24, and I believe their refusal to honor the claim violates the ************* ******** *** *** ****** * **** ** ***** and warrants your intervention.
  
  My vehicle, equipped with a 1-inch front lift and rear airbags for towing, installed prior to my purchase, experienced a transmission failure covered under the warranty. Route 66 denied my claim, citing these modifications as the reason, but failed to provide any evidence the lift or airbags caused the failure. Under the ************* ******** ***, a warrantor must demonstrate that a modification directly caused the damage to justify a claim denial. Despite my requests, Route 66 has not provided any test results, technical analysis, or documentation to support their decision. They have also failed to issue a written denial, leaving me without a clear explanation or opportunity to contest their reasoning.
  
  The **** repair shop that serviced my vehicle confirmed that these modifications are common for **** trucks and do not void their warranties. Similar lift and airbag kits are available through the manufacturer, indicating their compatibility with the vehicle’s design. Route 66’s blanket denial without evidence appears to be arbitrary and non-compliant with federal law.
  
  I have paid for the transmission replacement and am seeking reimbursement from Route 66 for these expenses, as their denial does not meet the legal standards outlined in the ************* ******** ***. I respectfully request the BBB’s assistance in mediating this dispute to ensure Route 66 honors the warranty terms or provides the required evidence to justify their denial. I am prepared to provide any additional documentation, including repair records and communications with Route 66, to support my case.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/04/2025

  Under the agreements there are terms and conditions that need to be meet. If you would like us to review your claim please submit your information for the claim and the claims department would be happy to review it. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/09/2025

   
  
  Complaint: ********
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  You mentioned that I need to submit information for the claim to be reviewed, but ACS already has the inspection report related to this matter. Could you please specify what additional information or documentation is required to proceed with the review? Additionally, please provide details on where and how to submit any further information, including the preferred format and contact information for the claims department.
  For clarity, could you also outline the specific terms and conditions in the agreement that must be met for the claim to be processed? This will help ensure I provide all necessary details to facilitate a resolution.
  I look forward to your prompt response and assistance in resolving this issue.
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ****** ******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/12/2025

  The lift is larger than 1 inch. As far as the ************* ******** ***, it applies to manufactures in this case **** warranty when originally sold. Once repairs have been made you are free to send a copy of the repair ticket in for review and possible good will assistance. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 06/18/2025

  Complaint: ********
  I am rejecting this response because:

  
  Proof of Lift Height: Your response states that the lift on my vehicle is larger than 1 inch, which you claim voids the warranty. However, you have not provided an inspection report or any evidence to substantiate this claim. Under the ************* ******** *** *** ****** * **** ** *****, the burden of proof lies with the warrantor to demonstrate that a modification caused the failure. Without a documented inspection report verifying the lift height and its direct impact on the transmission failure, your denial of coverage lacks substantiation. I request that you provide the inspection report or other evidence to support your claim.
  Applicability of the ************* ******** ***: You stated that the ************* ******** *** applies only to the manufacturer’s warranty and not to aftermarket warranties like the one purchased from ACS. This is incorrect. The ************* ******** *** governs all written warranties on consumer products, including aftermarket warranties, as long as the product costs more than $15 (15 U.S.C. § 2302). The Act requires that warranties be clear, enforceable, and not unfairly conditioned on the use of specific parts or services unless provided free of charge. Your warranty must comply with these federal requirements, and you cannot deny coverage without proving that the lift directly caused the transmission failure.
  Transmission Failure and **** TSB: The repair shop’s notes clearly state that the “damage to transmission is occurring due to shift drums and clutches,” which aligns with a known issue in certain **** vehicles. Specifically, **** Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) 24-2172 addresses transmission issues related to shift drums and clutches in certain models, indicating a design or manufacturing defect. This TSB supports the repair shop’s findings that the failure is due to inherent issues with the transmission components, not the aftermarket lift kit. Under the ************* ******** ***, you must prove that the lift kit directly caused or contributed to the failure, which you have not done. Given the documented evidence of a known issue, the lift kit cannot be reasonably cited as the cause of the transmission failure.
  In light of the above, I respectfully request that ACS honor the warranty coverage for the transmission repair or provide verifiable evidence that the lift kit directly caused the failure. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  ****** ******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 06/20/2025

  If you would like to go over the inspection please reach out to a claims supervisor there were pictures taken with a tape measure your shop is aware of this as well. Altering the suspension does and will cause premature failure of driveline parts including the transmission. Alterations to the truck should have been mentioned at the time of purchase. Please reach out to a claims supervisor to discuss further.