ComplaintsforTarmo, LLC

• Initial Complaint

  02/29/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  We purchased a warranty for our furniture that we bought from ****** in 2019. The warranty clearly states it covers pet damage, including rips. Our puppy ripped the piping on 2 pieces of our furniture. I submitted a claim and they told me it was not covered and denied my claim. I had made numerous calls and argued with them for months and just gave up. I would like the pieces either replaced as the warranty promised or my money back that I paid for the warranty. I have included claim #, date of purchase and warranty documentation in the pictures provided. ****** assured us that this warranty was the best and there would be no questions asked even for pet damage.

  Business response

  03/13/2024

  Dear ***** & ***********************,
  
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. We regret that you had a negative experience with our company. Our records show a claim was submitted on two portions of the Sectional for pet damage. Based on an internal Technician review it was determined the damage was not repairable. As a result we have processed a full replacement on both damaged Portions reported(right arm facing Chaise and Ottoman). The replacement authorization was sent to your store of purchase to replace the Portions at no extra charge to you. Please contact your original store of purchase for further assistance with the replacement.
  Sincerely,

• Initial Complaint

  11/20/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I contacted this company on April 15, 2023 regarding an issue with a leather chair purchased at Macys along with an extended warranty plan, which store signage and the Macys sales representative assured me would be a smart investment to ensure a worry-free protection with repair or replacement for a wide range of potential future issues with the furniture. Years after this initial purchase yet within the designated coverage period for the plan, I submitted a claim along with photos of the issue in question. Essentially, the leather on this chair split open in the footrest area while my husband was using the chair. It is worth noting that we purchased two identical chairs at the same time at Macys. Both were used in the same room with the same conditions and the second chair had no such issues. On April 17, two days after filing the claim, I received a denial of the claim indicating that the issue was from normal wear and tear and therefore not covered. There were no additional details or any technical justification provided just that the company had reviewed the photos and determined the finding. I immediately reached back out to the company to request additional information on why the claim was denied (other than the 1-2 sentence communication I received) and pointing out that the normal wear and tear finding made no sense given the second chair was fine. On April 19th, the company reached out again providing no additional details or justification for the denial but rather indicating I could file an appeal, but that I would need a copy of the original sales receipt and the warranty plan to do so. I then contacted ***** to get this information and the Macys customer service agent was surprised with the request. He said the warranty company already has this information on file indicating that Macys provides all of this documentation to the warranty company as each warranty plan is sold. This response made it clear to me that the company was trying to create more work for me to make filing the appeal more difficult and time consuming. I wrote back to the company on April 22nd asking the company to explain why I was being asked to resubmit information they had on file. I also communicated that I believed that the company never intended to fulfil this claim and that the quick denial with no real justification provided - and no effort to engage any technical experts - was indicative of this. Still, I secured all of the information needed for the appeal and on May 2nd, I submitted the formal appeal for the claim with all of the required information and requested specific and technical details to support any further findings. On the same day, I received a notification that the claim would be reviewed and a notification would be provided within 30 days. On June 5th, I followed up with the ******************* because I had not received any communications or updates within the 30-day window as promised. On June 5th the company responded via email and saying that they had sent an email on May 3rd an email I never received. Rather than reforward this email, they sent a screen shot of an internal system with a message of denial for the appeal. This message was again only a few sentences long and it simply restated the original finding indicating that the companys belief was that the issue was caused by normal wear and tear. On June 5th, I immediately replied to this email indicating that I had not received the communication that was noted in the system and again stating that I had requested more details on the substantiation of "normal" wear and tear. I stated that a two sentence, cryptic email reiterating the initial finding does not suffice. I asked for a detailed technical analysis to take to a 3rd party furniture restorer to verify that the assessment is indeed accurate. I indicated that the companys quick denials were wrong. I stated that the denials with almost no information or technical data or any real effort to properly investigate claims - demonstrated a clear intent to systematically deny all claims which is fraud. On June 7th, rather than receiving any response with any additional technical perspective, I received this email from the company indicating that any technical analysis would be at my own expense: This email serves as confirmation that an extensive review has completed of your claim. We regret to inform you that the dispute outcome remains the same. We recommend that you contact our top ************ *************************** at ************ for assistance. This would be an out of pocket expense as the damage isn't covered by the Extended Warranty. I immediately responded and again asked for a copy of the technical analysis that led to the denial. I spoke with a representative of the company indicating that I planned to reach out to regulatory authorities over the companys unwillingness to share any meaningful information about this claim and to charge me to ensure an independent analysis. Only then did the company agree to have a technical representative come out to our house to evaluate the chair. I received an email on June 13th saying a technical representative would come to evaluate the chair. Weeks after receiving this email, a technician came to our house. He examined the chair, and indicated that he would write a detailed report and share it with the company. On July 24th, I received the following email from the company: Based on the terms and condition of your protection plan your claim was not covered due normal wear and tear. As per the professional and licensed technician that was in your home, your furniture has normal wear and tear. As per the terms and conditions of your warranty normal wear and tear is not covered and as such we regret that we will be unable to take any further action on your claim. On July 24th, I called and emailed the company asking for a copy of the 3rd party report so I could see the findings myself. In spite of several requests for copies of this report, the company has systematically withheld this information only indicating that it does not share their reports and does not have to do so. The whole point of the 3rd party analysis was to help demonstrate the type of damage and if the plan should indeed cover repair or replacement. To that end, I cannot fathom why the company would refuse to share the findings, unless there was something in that report that indicated the claim should be supported. The companys refusal to be transparent about the results of the 3rd party inspection is the last straw in a very long process which has been terrible from start to finish. The company worked with ***** to sell us an extended warranty plan. We invested in this plan with the expectation that both companies would act fairly and in keeping with the promises made in all of the marketing materials was so actively promoted to us at the time of sale. Instead, this company quickly and systematically tried to shut down every honest attempt to redeem the warranty plan. Instead of proactively offering steps to help review the facts, the company tried to create barrier after barrier for us preventing a fair and principled review of the claim. While the company clearly had the discretion to send a 3rd party technician, they only offered to do when I suggested I might involve regulatory bodies. Then, when they finally sent a professional to our home, they refused to provide any information from the inspection report, an action which is highly suspect in nature. This was an expensive purchase for us. These two leather chairs which were delivered on 4/23/19 cost us $1880.38 in total. We opted for the Worry No More plan to protect this big investment. The Worry No More plan promised worry free use of our furniture for years with in home service and repair when needed. Instead, the plan has brought great aggravation and frustration and the company has wasted too much of my time. Whether the leather used for the chair was too thin, or the workmanship too poor, one thing is certain this issue was not caused by normal wear and tear. Still, rather than doing the right thing and honoring the investment that customers made in the plan, the company took our money and has done everything possible to prevent this from happen. Whats more, recent internet searches show that we are not the only ones who have had this experience with this company. There are almost 200 complaints calling the Macys plan a scam or a fraud on the **************** Over 72% of Amazon reviews call the plan a scam, indicating that their claims were inexcusably denied. The Consumer Affairs Site gives the Worry No More plan 1.7 out of 5 starts with hundreds of reviews citing deceptive practices. Your actions demonstrate consistent and ongoing deceptive consumer practices, false advertising and more. How is this company allowed to remain in business?

  Business response

  11/30/2023

  Dear *******************,

  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was filed on the Recliner for rips on the footrest from normal use. It was indicated in the note section of the claim "The leather ripped during normal use". The Protection Plan purchase covers accidental stains or damage from an accidental occurrence. Please find attached the terms and conditions of the Protection Plan purchased. We have highlighted the specifics of the coverage as well as exclusions in your Plan for your review. Based on the information provided it was determined the damage reported is the result of wear and tear rather than a specific accident. Wear and tear is the expected decline in the condition of a product due to regular daily use. It is expected that there will be some damage that occurs from repeated daily use rather than a specific incident. Wear and tear is expressly excluded from coverage and therefore ineligible for service. As such the outcome of the claim was set to non covered on 04/17. The outcome was disputed and the Disputes team confirmed the non covered outcome on 05/03. On 06/13 a Supervisor returned a Supervisor callback request, during this conversation the Supervisor advised how we had adjudicated the claim and explained the coverage of the Plan. The Supervisor offered to send a Technician to further evaluate and advised the claim would be further adjudicated using the Technician report.

  A service Technician was assigned, the service visit was on 06/28. Upon inspection of the Recliner the Technician advised the leather of the footrest was torn due to wear and tear. It was also noted the small footrest was starting to tear from wearing. Based on this information, the claim was non covered on 07/19. We can provide a copy of the Technicians report to the Better Business Bureau upon their request. As such, we apologize to inform you will be unable to take any further actions on your claim.
  
  Please be advised As stated under the Protection Plan "Proof of Purchase: Each time that you request service as provided by this Plan, you must make available for inspection by the Provider a copy of this Plan, along with the original dated invoice and/or cash register receipt that clearly indicates your purchase of this Plan, and the product to be covered by this Plan." 
  
  Sincerely, 

• Initial Complaint

  11/15/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  I purchased a warranty from Value City Furniture that is valid thru 11/24/2025. It is for 4 identical movie theater seats . 2 of the 4 have already been repaired and a third is having the same issue. The first two, a technician was sent to my home and easily repaired , no hassle no out of pocket expensive. It was an excellent experience and resolved as it should be . On the third chair without an inspection they offered me a cash resolution and or a re-select. I don't want either , the item is no longer produced or available and I am not going to change 1 of 4 chairs. Just send a repair person to fix the item which is most likely the same issue as the other 2. I am just looking for the same resolution that I received from the first 2 chairs.

  Business response

  11/17/2023

  Dear **************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show the claim was submitted on the Recliner for not turning on. The claim was moved to a resolution offer with two options; settlement offer or a replacement of the item. We show the settlement was rejected and as such the claim moved to a full replacement of the item. As you are advising you would prefer to have the item repaired. We have cancelled the full replacement authorization. A service Technician has been assigned to inspect and repair the ****************** service Technician will contact you directly within 3-5 business days to schedule a service appointment. Once the technicians report is received, your claim will be further adjudicated based on the technicians report and the terms and conditions of the plan.
  Sincerely, 

  Customer response

  11/20/2023

  The service has not been scheduled yet . The repair has not been completed so I cannot accept or decline their response . They have responded and its a fair response it they follow through which has not happened yet .

  Customer response

  11/27/2023

  Date Sent: 11/20/2023 10:22:05 PM
  The service has not been scheduled yet . The repair has not been completed so I cannot accept or decline their response . They have responded and its a fair response it they follow through which has not happened yet .

  Business response

  11/30/2023

  Dear **************,
  Thank you for your response. We show the ****************** that was assigned conducted a virtual inspection on 11/22/2023. The inspection determined the Recliner would require a part for repairs. As such, we ordered the part needed. We now show the part has been shipped via ***** with tracking number 787255041220. We have assigned a Technician to contact you within 5-7 days to confirm the receipt of the part and set up the appointment for the part installation.
  Sincerely,

  Customer response

  12/01/2023

   
  Complaint: 20877923
  
  I am rejecting this response because: the part nor appointment have occurred yet .  Although I will say so far the service and responsiveness has been adequate.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

  Business response

  12/08/2023

  Dear **************,
  Our records show the part was delivered on Monday 12/04. We show the appointment to install the parts is scheduled for 12/12/2023. Once the Technician report is received the claim will be further adjudicated. You will be further notified of any updates on your claim through your online portal at www.warrantyservice.com
  Sincerely, 

  Customer response

  12/21/2023

   
  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

  09/14/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  On 02/02/2020, we purchased a $3,218.36 sofa from Living Spaces and added a 5-year $434.25 Uniters (Tarmo) protection plan, covering accidental stains, rips, or ***** from a single incident.On 04/23/2023, a 7-year-old guest accidentally marked our sofa with a marker when a cap fell off, an unintentional and isolated occurrence. However, processing a warranty claim turned into a nightmare:- Initiated the claim C2857817 on 04/24/2023, but encountered app glitches displaying the wrong item.- Despite numerous calls, it took weeks to link the claim to the correct policy.- Technical issues further delayed proceedings, and the technician's visit on 08/26/2023 was hindered by insufficient documentation. He was unprepared due to having received only one picture from Uniters, but he acknowledged that my case clearly would be covered because he confirmed the ink damage was due to a one-time accidental incident.- Promises of resolution were followed by conflicting information, leaving the case unresolved.- Multiple apologies acknowledged errors on Uniters' end, with potential cash payouts or replacements mentioned.- In a puzzling turn, I was informed that the claim required a dispute, which hadn't been communicated earlier.- Initially, the claim was denied for "accumulation," contrary to the agreed single incident.- Despite clarification, the denial reason shifted to "misuse" due to alleged intentional drawing by a child, which was not the case and which I promptly refuted.- No further clarification was provided from the company Emails exchanged between 09/07/2023 and 09/12/2023 with the warranty department document these frustrating twists, with no clear explanation provided for the denial's shifting rationale. It appears the company is attempting to evade their obligation to honor this claim, despite its clear alignment with their warranty terms.We have attached all pertinent documents, including coverage details, images of the damage, and email exchanges.

  Business response

  09/15/2023

  Dear *********************** ****,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was filed on three portions of the Sectional for ink stains. A service Technician was assigned to inspect and clean the stains. Upon inspecting the Sectional portions the Technician advised the ink stains could be attempted to be removed but it would not guarantee success. As a result and as your desired resolution we have now authorized a full replacement of the whole Sectional.  The replacement authorization was sent to your store of purchase to replace the Sectional with merchandise of equal or lesser value to the original Sectional at no extra charge to you.  Please contact your original store of purchase for further assistance with the replacement.
  Sincerely,

  Customer response

  09/18/2023

   
  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

  08/14/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  I purchased a couch from ****** and a related WorryNoMore furniture insurance policy from Tarmo, LLC. The policy states it covers up to three instances of pet damage. On 6.10.23, my dog largely destroyed my couch while I was sleeping; she ripped the zippers on the two back cushions and two seat cushions, and then ripped stuffing out of the cushions. I submitted my claim on 6.26.23 and heard nothing until I called to follow up on 7.21.23. On that date I was told the damage to my couch was not covered as it was the result of "repetitive damage over time," which is contrary to what I'd reported to the company. There was no analysis of coverage, nor was there any indication of how they came to their conclusion, which is contrary to what was reported. The damage occurred all at once, in one night. The policy does not define "occurrence." I demanded a written response as well as a copy of my policy, both of which were received by me that day. I disputed their faulty findings in a letter dated 7.28.23, and in return received a computer-generated denial which was almost identical to the first. Neither contained any analysis or addressed my questions or concerns. The company website says only one dispute is allowed and they consider the matter closed. I submitted further information and advised I would contact the BBB, *** ***** of ********* Services, and file in small claims court or for arbitration. I have not heard from them since. Lack of any analysis proving their case, together with ambiguous policy terms, should not result in a failure to provide coverage for my valid claim and is in bad faith. I demand either replacement of my couch or full repair of the damaged cushions, as provided under the policy.

  Business response

  08/15/2023

  Dear ****************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was submitted on the Sofa for pet damage on both seats and back casings. Based on the photos provided it has been determined the damage would not be repairable. As a result, WorryNoMore has emailed you an offer to resolve the claim. The claim will be processed once we receive your decision in regards to the offer.
  Sincerely,  

  Customer response

  08/17/2023

   
  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. They offered either a cash payment of $286 or replacement of my couch in an equal or lesser amount than the original purchase price from the retailer. I have elected to have my couch replaced.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *************************

• Initial Complaint

  08/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  The company took more than 2 months to review and deny a claim for a couch warranty. In that time they provided 3-4 changing determinations on what was the real issue with the couch and why it was not covered despite all of their explanations not matching with the technician who came on site's analysis of the issue. Additionally, they did not ever directly quote or cite the terms and conditions and instead misrepresented the issues and coverage. They simply told me "refer to the terms and conditions of your warranty" despite the fact I was providing direct quotes and references while they were making generalized and inaccurate descriptions of those terms. It was clear from the start that they were set on denying the claim because it would necessitate replacement of the full couch. Working with a warranty claim is always an uphill battle, but the degree to which they were deceitful and showed a clear unwillingness to actually refer to the terms and conditions was shameful. I will be reporting their behavior to the state AG's office for consumer protection.

  Business response

  08/07/2023

  Dear Mr. *******
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was filed 04/05/2023 on the Sectional for spring damage.  A service Technician was assigned by our **************** to inspect and repair the damages on 04/06/2023. The appointment was set for 05/19/2023. Upon inspecting the Sectional the Technician found no frame or spring damage on the Sectional. The technician advised the seats are sagging due to the internal cores that have shifted from normal use. Normal wear and tear is the expected decline in the condition of a product due to regular daily use. It is expected that there will be some damage that occurs from repeated daily use rather than a specific incident. Wear and tear is expressly excluded from coverage and therefore ineligible for service. Furthermore, the internal cores shifting would be considered loss of resiliency. Loss of resiliency is the softening and flattening of the foam and fiber in the cushions over time through regular use and is not the result of an accident or specific incident. Loss of resiliency is expressly excluded from coverage, and therefore ineligible for service. The claim was completed as non covered after the processing and review of the Technician report on 05/31/2023. The protection plan purchased covers specific types of occurrences listed on the coverage section of your plan. As per the terms and conditions of the plan purchased, anything not specifically listed in the COVERAGE section of this Service Plan is excluded. Please find attached the terms and conditions of the Protection Plan purchased. We have highlighted the specifics of the coverage as well as exclusions in your Plan for your review. As such we apologize for  any inconvenience this may cause as we will be unable to take any further actions on your claim.
  Sincerely, 

  Customer response

  08/07/2023

   
  Complaint: 20427416
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  First, this is a completely different accounting of the issue than the technician presented at the time of the appointment on May 19th. At the very least I would like to see documentation of this determination along with any images submitted by the technician. I find it hard to believe that such a determination could be made without any examination of the internal sections of the couch, which was not conducted on the impacted section in the brief 5 minute visit.

  Second, the details and explanations provided in this response are completely different from what communications I have received from the company to date. In the findings presented during the claim, there is no contestation that the springs were not damaged (see attached image of the companys findings).

  Loss of resiliency is only applicable to foam and cushion shape, so I find it odd that you are now changing the explanation to conveniently leave out the springs as a part of the problem while I consistently raised the fact that loss of resiliency and normal wear and tear did not apply to springs in my appeal and initial warranty claim.Normal wear and tear again is limited to cosmetic damage as the highlights you made to the policy describe. I am genuinely stunned that you are trying to combine two separate clauses and apply them to a facet of the couch that neither cover. You reference internal cores shifting, which again is a departure from previous claims that the spring protrusion is a result of simply flattening of cushions, but it is unclear from any communication received to date how the shifting of cores would result in protruding springs. Also, if there is shifting of the springs in of itself implies that there was a failure of joints or other manufactured bindings which are again expressly covered and are not subject to the loss of resiliency or normal wear and tear exclusions.
  
  On top of all of this, there remains the fact that my additional issue in this claim of stitched seams separating was not covered in any responses.

  This response is a huge departure from previous communications and explanations of the determined issue. The fact that this response is more detailed and yet again shifts the technical explanation for the deficiencies in the couch is a telling sign that the company made a prior determination of non-coverage is trying to justify their behavior after the fact with shifting and abstract language.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************************

  Business response

  08/10/2023

  Dear ******************,
  Thank you for your response. The claim was adjudicated based on the information submitted at the time of the claim submission, the service Technicians report and the terms and conditions of the Plan. The claim was only filed for 1 fault; spring damage. The service Technician was assigned to inspect and repair the spring damage, based on his finding there is no spring or frame damage on the item. The issue would be to the internal cores that are causing the seats to sag and the cores to shift. Based on this information the damage would be considered normal wear and tear as it has happened from repeated daily use rather than a specific incident. Loss of resiliency is the softening and flattening of the foam and fiber in the cushions over time through regular use and is not the result of an accident or specific incident, based on the Technicians report as the internal cores have shifted causing the sagging of the seats it would be determined the item has loss of resiliency. There have been two communications sent advising on the non covered outcome. The first communication was sent during the initial review of the Technician report on 05/31/2023, at the time it was advised the reported issue would be the result of wear and tear, therefore ineligible for service. The second communication was sent during the Dispute process on 06/08/2023, the ****************** responded to the disputed outcome advising the reported fault would be considered loss of resiliency and wear and tear. This information is visible through the online portal and on the screenshot provided it advises you can review the results of the assessment in the **************** portal. The phrasing of the non covered communication does not negate the fact that the Technician did not find any issues with the springs or the frame of the item. As such, we apologize to inform you that we will stand by our initial decision and will be unable to take any action on your claim.
  Sincerely, 

• Initial Complaint

  05/30/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On 12/03/2022, I contacted ******** Services (ran through Tarmo LLC) about a couch cover I needed replaced since the zipper became dislodged when trying to zip up cover. Originally, ******** Services requested pictures. I uploaded them through their website, and then six days later, I received an email to send pictures in a reply email. I obliged and sent them through a response email. After numerous attempts to rectify this issue (send pictures to ******** Services through email and their website, as requested by them), the only response they gave was consistent: resend pictures. I reached out for over a month attempting to rectify this situation, with no other response. ******** Services now states that I have not uploaded these pictures and closed out the ticket to get it fixed. There is no other way to communicate with ******** Services as no phone number was provided.

  Business response

  05/31/2023

  Dear ******************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information reported. Our records show a claim was filed on the right arm facing Sofa portion of the Sectional for breakage of the back casing zipper. At the time of the claim submission the photos provided were unable to be viewed as they were unable to be open. The video submitted allowed us to see it was the back casing with zipper breakage, but the item could not be correctly identified to ensure validation of the details submitted. Your claim has now been reactivated. Based on the video provided the zipper will not be able to be fixed and we have been informed by the store the back casing is not available for replacement. As a result, a full replacement of the right arm facing Sofa portion of the Sectional has been authorized. The replacement authorization was sent to your original store of purchase to replace the Portion at no extra charge to you. Please contact your original store of purchase for further assistance with the replacement. If you need to contact us you may call the ************************** at ************, Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 9:00 pm and Saturday from 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
  Sincerely,

• Initial Complaint

  12/09/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I reached out to the company for my warranty on the product, I was denied my warranty due to a typo during the claims process, I was told that it was reported after 30 days, and that I only had thirty days per occurrence to report, I noticed the stains in Dec and reported in December, but the typo put Oct. I feel they are just trying to find a way to deny my claim. I also reported that the couch has a misaligned back.

  Business response

  12/13/2022

  Dear ****************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was filed on the Sofa for unknown spots all over, possible frame damage and a burn. At the time of the claim submission it was indicated the damages were discovered more than ************************************************************************* damage to be reported within 30 days of discovery, any issue reported outside the reporting time frame is expressly excluded from coverage and, therefore, ineligible for service. Before submitting the claim, our portal requires the information entered to be reviewed and confirmed to ensure it is accurate and complete. If not, the information can be updated. Once the claim is submitted we are unable to make any changes or amendments to it. Furthermore, the Protection Plan purchase covers all accidental stains attributed to a single occurrence. This Plan is not a maintenance or cleaning contract. As such we regret to inform you we will be unable to take any further action on your claim.
  Sincerely,
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  08/25/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I have filled a claim to have my couch footrest repaired which had stopped working some months ago. Due to schedule constraints it was not practical to have a person come out to the house to repair it until after our move. They have denied our claim saying it was due to the move, but I have been told 3 different stories now, one person never even mentioned the footrest and said it was the *** port being denied. We cannot use half or couch because it is stuck in the up position. In the claim I made it clear the move had nothing to do with the issue, it is electronic. They are ignoring my communications, and not providing me with a reasonable way to continue disputing this claim refusal. The issue is covered under the warranty and should be repaired by them immediately.

  Business response

  08/25/2022

  Dear **********************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was filed on the recliner Sofa with two faults, the first fault was submitted for the *** not working.  At the time of the claim submission it was indicated the issue has always been there and the cause to be Initial Delivery damage. The issue should have been reported right away to the original store of purchase to be addressed under the store or manufacturer warranty to prevent further damage. As per the terms and conditions of your plan, all occurrences of covered stains and or damages must be reported within 30 days of discovery, any issue reported outside the reporting time frame is expressly excluded from coverage and not eligible for service. 
  The second fault was submitted for the Recliner Mechanism not functioning, a service Technician has been assigned to inspect and repair the item. The service Technician will contact you directly within 3-5 business days to schedule a service appointment. Once the technicians report is received, your claim will be further adjudicated based on the technicians report and the terms and conditions of the plan. You will be further notified of the updates on your claim through the online portal at warrantyservice.com.
  Sincerely,

• Initial Complaint

  02/25/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I filed a warranty claim on 10/19/21. I then had a scheduled appointment for a technician to come out and inspect the furniture. Technician stated they could repair but needed to order a part. Part was ordered early November. After the part order their site/app and help center personnel would only tell me parts can take up to 3 months to arrive. After 3 several business days past 3 months I called the store and they called the warranty personnel and then I was told the issue would be escalated since it was past 3 months and possibly look into cash payment or replacement and to call back in 5-7 business days for an update. After 7 business days I called and now the only update they will give me is that I now have to wait till 3/18/22 for the part. I was told they would email me shipment details but they have not.

  Business response

  02/23/2023

  Dear **************,
  We have taken the opportunity to review the claim and information provided. Our records show a claim was submitted on the Loveseat Dual recliner for mechanism breakage. A service Technician was dispatched by **************** to inspect and repair the damages. Upon inspection of the Loveseat the technician advised parts would be needed to complete the repair. A part replacement was issued for the Mechanism and the console hinges. The replacement authorization was sent to your original store of purchase to order the parts needed from the manufacturer and ship it to you at no extra charge. We received notification from the store that the part requested was not available. As a result **************** emailed you an offer to resolve your claim. The offer to settle the claim was rejected online. As such a full replacement authorization was issued for the Loveseat Dual recliner. The replacement authorization was sent to your original store of purchase to replace the Loveseat Dual Recliner with merchandise of equal or lesser value to the original item at no extra charge to you. We have confirmed with your store of purchase the Full Replacement authorization was fulfilled in May of 2022. As such we will consider this matter resolved.
  Sincerely,

*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. ↩