ComplaintsforResidential Warranty Corporation Of PA

• Initial Complaint

  07/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  This concerns failure to perform on a home warranty.My builder has failed to honor the home warranty he contractually agreed to with me. The administrator of the policy is interpreting and misapplying the policy in improper ways to prevent enforcement and recovery, protecting the builder.I will attach supporting documentation.

  Business response

  07/10/2023

  For issues arising in the first year of home ownership, RWC is the administrator of the RWC limited warranty and the builder is the warrantor. RWC has been actively working with the homeowner and the builder to get the Year 1 items resolved by the builder. Most recently, RWC emailed the homeowner on July 6, 2023 with an update on RWC's efforts (see attached). Today, July 10, 2023, the builder put in writing the 3 items that will be resolved and this was sent to the homeowner by email (see attached). RWC will continue to monitor to make certain the repairs are completed. These actions should resolve all of the ************************************** concerns. 

  Thank you. **********************************, Esq.

  Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management

  Customer response

  07/17/2023

  [A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
  
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********. While they have contacted me and offered to fix three outstanding issues (one of them they have refused to resolve), I believe I have encountered bad faith treatment of my warranty contract. First, their representative misconstrued the contract to unfairly benefit the builder. Their representative argued with me about the meaning of the contract. For example, I noted the following in an email to them:

  "Light switch improper installation covered by 5.2: 'Outlets, switches or fixtures malfunction. Builder will correct if caused by defective workmanship or materials. Owner should exercise routine care and maintenance. Replacement of light bulbs is Owner's responsibility.'
  The home inspection report noted: 'The light and fan switches were not wired properly in the front bedroom. The light goes on and off with the
  switch that should operate the fan only.'
  This defect is outstanding."
  

  In response, their representative said that my malfunctioning light switch was not covered by the warranty without any reasoning. In response, I offered the following reasoning:

  "The plain meaning of 'malfunction' under *****'s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition, is: 'A fault in the way something works, as with a machine, a piece of one's wardrobe, or a part of one's body.' The warranty agreement does not provide an alternative definition of 'malfunction.' Unfortunately, my light switch is not functioning as designed. It has a fault in the way that it works. Consequently, it is malfunctioning. I am pleased to restate that 5.2 of the warranty agreement covers malfunctions of switches. This is 'caused by defective workmanship'.
  Am I missing something?"
  

  My light switch has since been fixed under the warranty, and the electricians said that the lightswitch was completely miswired. However, it has been an uphill battle with his company, and my impression of their mediation process is that they overly favor the contract for the builder instead of for the homeowner.

  Second, this company appears to me to be trying to take advantage of consumers. For example, they disclaim all implied warranties that are generally offered in every state for new construction homeowners. They have claimed that my improperly installed kitchen sink - which a plumber said was one of the worst jobs he'd ever seen - is not covered under their warranty. According to them, the seal around my sink does not qualify for their "plumbing fixtures and trim fittings" leak warranty; thus, this issue was not resolved. Further, I've had to pay additional out of pocket expenses for poor jobs around my house and the builder's attempt to escape responsibility for those by disclaiming implied warranties: such as replacing my cracked attic ladder on a new construction home (several hundred dollars) and repairing door frames throughout the home due screws being stripped when originally installed.

  I would caution consumers against dealing with this warranty company, and I want the Better Business Bureau to know about it.

  Regards,
  
  *****************************

• Initial Complaint

  05/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I bought a house and closed on the house from *************** on 8/31/2020. I had issues in and out of the house that *************** subcontractor contractors made promises to fix the problems before and after closing. Is has taken 2 years for some of the issues to be fixed and others have not.? After I year I was told warranty doesn't will not cover what they should covered and fixing before the one year. So I was told to get in touch RWC because the house is not covered by *************** contractors and subcontractor any longer. I send an email to RWC regarding the issues in the house. There are cracks and holes that *************** contractors subcontractors have know about on the foundation. That I didn’t cause. RWC is telling me I have to fix the problem because the cracks under the house is not part of the foundation. The cracks is under the foundation and RWC doesn’t want to fix the issues. The “Siding” is coming out too., I am sending pictures and videos to proof my claim. The house is 2 years 8 months and 6 days old. I have more issues on the house that needs to be fix or resolved. But Learning how ** ****** and RWC works together to deny homeowners claims. I have to hire professionals to come to house to access the cracks in front of the house to prove it to RWC there is issues. 

  Business response

  05/12/2023

  Good afternoon,

  I reviewed ***************************** file with RWC, which is still open. RWC File No. ***** was opened on March 10, 2023. Her warranty request to RWC focused on a claim for a structural defect due to a foundation crack on her front porch. A Fact Finding Inspection was performed on April 10, 2023 by **************************, P.E. (See attached Inspection Report). Attached you will find the applicable warranty book. In accordance with the warranty standards in Section I.B.14, the following conditions must be met to constitute a Major Structural Defect: (a) actual physical damage to a specified load-bearing component of the home; (b) causing the failure of the specific major structural component; and (c) which affects its load-bearing function to the degree that it materially affects the physical safety of the occupants of the home. On April 27, 2023, the attached Warranty Coverage Report was issued based on the engineer's findings and there was a denial of coverage. The reasoning for this denial was that all 3 prongs of the standard for Major Structural Defect were not found by the engineer. Specifically, the engineer found physical damage to the foundation but the engineer was of the opinion that there was no failure which affected the load-bearing function of the foundation. Further, the safety prong of the standard for Major Structural Defect was also not met. The Warranty Coverage Report concludes with an explanation of the next step under the warranty process. If a homeowner chooses not to accept any portion of the Warranty Coverage Report, then the homeowner may initiate the arbitration process by giving RWC written notice of a request for arbitration of the Unresolved Warranty Issue. ******************** file remains open and if she chooses to pursue arbitration we will promptly provide the necessary paperwork to have the case sent to an independent arbitration service which will schedule an arbitration at her home to review in person the claimed defect and the warranty standards.

  If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. Thank you. *********************************, Esq  Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management 

  Customer response

  05/23/2023

  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Please see attached. 
  Regards,
  
  *************************
  

  Business response

  05/23/2023

  Good Afternoon.

  The handwritten first rebuttal from the homeowner now states that her BBB complaint is related to siding. However, the original BBB complaint details cracks under the foundation. Further, foundation concerns were submitted to RWC in the request for warranty performance and that was the issue inspected by the engineer. The home is in Year 3 of warranty coverage. Therefore, coverage for Major Structural Defects remains on the home. As indicated previously, in accordance with the warranty standards in Section I.B.14, the following conditions must be met to constitute a Major Structural Defect: (a) actual physical damage to a specified load-bearing component of the home; (b) causing the failure of the specific major structural component; and (c) which affects its load-bearing function to the degree that it materially affects the physical safety of the occupants of the home. The engineer found that the Major Structural Defect criteria were not met with respect to the foundation concerns. Likewise, siding is specifically listed in the warranty as "examples of non-load-bearing elements deemed not to have Major Structural Defect potential: (6) any type of exterior siding". Section I.B.14. RWC File No. ***** is still open and the homeowner has the option to file a request for arbitration in accordance with the warranty provisions should she wish to have an independent arbitrator come to her home to review the foundation issues and determine if there is coverage under the RWC warranty. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. Thank you, ******* ** ********, Esq. Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management

  Customer response

  05/23/2023

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
  
   Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:the original complaint was about cracks, holes and siding that RWC and *************** contractors, subcontractor(s ), Architect have know about since I bought the house. But they are taking advantage of telling me to choose arbitration if I want to be heard. Arbitration involves money and I don’t have to waste on something I didn’t create or cause the issues. Verify through a third party expert the problems that I believe is home defects is a type of defect the contractor, subcontractor, builder architect should be responsible for, and should correct 

  Regards,
  
  *************************

• Initial Complaint

  10/31/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On Feb 10, 2022 I submitted a letter informing RWC, Warranty Resolotion Department that I reported a failure in the brick wall above the garage door built by their client DR Horton. The lintel / beam had failed to support the bricks above resulting in a crack in eight courses of bricks above the center of the garage door. I informed them that their client sent a representative out to look at the problem but refused to fix or to recommend a fix for the condition on the basis it was months beyond their two year warranty. They informed me that RWC was their insurance that ppicks up after three years for certain structural defficiencies up to 10 years after construction. RWC informed me by phone that neither the builder nor they were responsible after the two year warranty period. Their representative was adament that they would not address the issue any further. I have located at least one other home on this street of townhomes that ** ****** built at the same time that has the same issue of bricks cracking due to lentil failure.

  Business response

  11/01/2022

  RWC reviewed the ****** request for warranty performance (which is attached for your review). Based on the pictures supplied by the homeowner, the issue appears to be cracked brick veneer. With the home being in Year 4 of coverage only major structural defects are covered during Years 3-10. The homeowner was advised of the definition for major structural defect coverage in a letter dated February 24, 2022 (see attached). That letter further advised that if the homeowner wanted to have the area inspected by an engineer in the event the homeowner believed there was a major structural defect, the RWC limited warranty states that the homeowner would need to expose the area behind the brick under the "substantiation" requirement in the warranty. This was also explained to the homeowner's father in a telephone call on February 24, 2022. At this time, the offer stands to send a certified engineer to inspect the area for a major structural defect if the homeowner will have the brick removed under the substantiation requirements. If a major structural defect is found, the costs incurred by the homeowner to substantiate the defect will be reimbursed by RWC.  

  If you need any further information, please advise. Sincerely, Deborah ** C***************, Esq. Associate General Counsel/ Director of Warranty Risk Assessment

  Business response

  12/08/2022

  Good morning, *** ******.

  Based on your most recent BBB communication, you are misinterpreting the definition of Major Structural Defect. (See RWC Limited Warranty booklet Section I.B.14 for MSD definitions).

  The definition of Major Structural Defect requires: All of the following conditions must be met to constitute a Major Structural Defect: a. actual physical damage to one or more of the following specified load-bearing components of the Home: b. causing the failure of the specific major structural components; and c. which affects its load-bearing function to the degree that it materially affects the safety of the occupants of the Home.

  The definition then goes on to list the 8 possible areas of MSD with only ONE of the eight areas being necessary if the above 3 elements are met. Load-bearing components of the Home deemed to have MSD potential: (1) roof framing members (rafters and trusses); (2) floor framing members (joists and trusses); (3) bearing walls; (4) columns; (5) lintels (other than lintels supporting veneers): (6) girders; (7) load-bearing beams; and (8) foundation systems and footings.

  Finally, the definition section lists some areas that would not have load-bearing potential. The relevant example for your home of non-load-bearing elements deemed not to have MSD potential: (5) brick, stucco, stone, veneer, or exterior wall sheathing
  RWC is the administrator of your limited warranty.

  RWC is separate from your builder and has no access to plans or specification for you home. Our only information about your home is what we received from you by way of pictures and description. You mentioned both a beam and the lintel, and that is why an inspection of these areas was offered. As we have stated numerous times, RWC is offering to schedule a certified engineer to inspect the area at no cost to the homeowner, but the engineer does not do a destructive inspection. For that reason, the homeowner must substantiate the need for warranty performance by opening the area for the engineer to inspect.

  "When a request for warranty performance is filed and the deficiency cannot be observed under normal conditions, it is your responsibility to substantiate the need for warranty performance exists including any cost involved. If properly substantiated, you will be reimbursed by the Warrantor." (See Section IV.D).

  There is nothing more that RWC can offer to you if you refuse to open the area to make it visible for the engineer to inspect. I do not believe that anything is being accomplished by going back and forth on this BBB process. RWC remains ready and willing to schedule a certified engineer as soon as you let us know that you have exposed the area for the engineer to inspect. Neither RWC nor the engineer will come into your home and do a destructive inspection.

  Thank you. Deborah C******* Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management

  Customer response

  12/13/2022

  [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
  
   Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  We respectfully reject the company’s latest response for the following reasons:

  1. Thanks for the attempted clarification of the poorly stated definition of major structural defects in RWC’s brochure. Perhaps it is not on purpose, but the brochure tends to doubletalk the definition to mean that all eight conditions must occur simultaneously. Perhaps it is not intended but the double talk will discourage some of your clients from making a claim. If that is not the intent RWC should take this opportunity to clarify their catalogue to hopefully avoid future conflicts such as this.
  

  2. The double talk continues in the sentence that states “finally the definition section lists some area that would not have load bearing potential….” It goes on to mention several items of which brick is one. Is the company claiming that if the lintel in question is holding up a brick wall that the lintel is not covered? This MUST be clarified because if so, this case is wasting the BBB’s time and mine.

  3. Is RWC’s position that they do not have access to DR Horton’s design and cannot get it or that they do not need it because their engineers know what lintel type is needed without it?RWC’s engineers must know what they will be looking for when they come out.
  

  4. They must know either from the plans or their prior experience or from their own calculations. They must know the size of the lintel length, width, thickness, and / or any manufacturer’s marking. If they don’t know what they will be looking for they need not come out. If they do know PLEASE share it with me so I know how much of the building I need to destroy for RWC to act responsibly.
  

  5. Finally, please have one of your engineers read and help respond back to my specific questions in #3 above.If the homeowner is expected to dismantle enough of the building for your engineer to make his determination it is fair for the homeowner to know specifically what the engineer needs to see as a minimum.I don’t expect an attorney type or clerical person to appreciate the need for this information, but your engineer will.
  Please let me know if RWC simply cannot understand my repeated request in item #3 above or if it does not agree that the homeowner deserves to know what your engineer needs to see such as size and shape of the lintel to determine adequacy, so I don’t have to have my contractor dismantle more than is necessary. If the company’s charge is to make the homeowner go away by demonstrating that they have no intention of acting responsibly this is a waste of BBB’s time.
  
  BBB: Please let me know how I can research if this is the only case on BBB’s file against RWC and the outcome of the other cases if they exist. If the track record is that they do not offer anything except empty words, then they are correct that this is a waste of BBB’s time.
  
  Regards,
  
  ******* ******
  
  PS RWC: The company's Feb 24 letter you previously attached was signed by a Dwan H***** of the Warranty Resolution Dept. Is that name just a coincidence or is he related to ** ******? 
  

• Initial Complaint

  08/09/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Order Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I am a first time home buyer. I purchased my home last year in April 2021. A month later I noticed cracks in my tile floor, walls, and door frames. I reached out to the builders (***************** on 10/31/21 on their website) per my realtor ********************************* of ** *******. I representative names ***************************** emailed on 10/14/21 stating Thank you for your email. Our records indicate your home is currently in the 3 thru 10 Year Limited Structural Warranty provided by the Residential Warranty Co. (RWC). The RWC warranty is provided to you as part of your new home purchase. We encourage you to review your RWC booklet for available warranty coverage per year of coverage. In order to initiate an RWC investigation you are required to send RWC a letter describing your structural related concerns. Basically there was a lot of back and forth the builder and RWC. I sent a certified letter with the issues of my home. Basically the RWC is stating they are keeping me in year four of the 10 year warranty and stated the issues should have been submitted during year 1. I was not in the home in year one it was a previous owner. The house is only 4 years old. RWC confirmed there is something wrong with the foundation but they are not going to fix it, and that the cracks and stuff from the inside of my home is my fault. I contacted two outside foundation repair companies ****** ********** and ** **** ********** who both told me by law no one will come to your home due to you are still under a 10 year warranty and to contact your warranty company to fix the issue. So how am I suppose to get the foundation fixed If the warranty company refuses to fix it. Keep in mind I've only been in the home at this point 1 year and 4 months now as of today. I need help because I want to file arbitration. Had I known there was something wrong with the foundation I would not have purchased the home. Enclosed are the contacts back and forth to include the supporting documents. Please help me. *****

  Business response

  08/31/2022

  The home purchased by ************************* is in coverage Year 4 under the RWC Limited Warranty and at this time has coverage for major structural defects for 10 years. RWC received a claim for cracked floor tiles in January of 2022 and this was closed because this type of cosmetic issue is only potentially covered in Year 1. At that time, RWC was not made aware of any issues or concerns related to the foundation of the home.

  Based on the new information provided by ************************* in this BBB Complaint, RWC has reopened her file due to possible foundation issues. RWC will be in contact with the homeowner to schedule an engineer inspection and a determination will be make as to  whether there are any failures that would meet the major structural defect standard in the RWC Limited Warranty.

  Please let me know if you would like any additional information at this time. Sincerely, Deborah *. C**********, Esq. Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management

• Initial Complaint

  06/08/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  These people are fraud. Literally cannot get a person on the phone. No call backs and no replies to emails. Per their contract my house foundation is covered. Yet they won't respond at all. After reading online reviews it seems this is some form of a shell company who's mission is to deny claims by any means necessary. I'll upload photos of the foundation issues. My certification number with them (residential warranty company) is ******* date of service commencement 3-14-2016

  Business response

  06/14/2022

  Good afternoon. I reviewed our documentation of all contact with ******* ****** and believe that Residential Warranty Company (RWC) acted very promptly with respect to ************'s Request for Warranty Performance. On June 6, 2022, **************** completed the RWC Warranty Resolution Inquiry webform at 4:05 pm. On June 8, 2022, his Request for Warranty Performance was opened as File No. ***** and it was assigned to an advisor. **************'s warranty advisor attempted telephone contact that same day. The next day, June 9, 2022, the warranty advisor reached **************** by telephone to discuss his warranty issues, get additional information from ****************, and she advised that she would arrange a Fact Finding Inspection. **************** agreed with the decision to have an inspection at his home. On June 10, 2022, the warranty advisor contacted the engineer ***********************, P.E. and requested that the Fact Finding Inspection be scheduled for ****************. On June 13, 2022, RWC wrote to all parties to inform them that the Fact Finding Inspection will be held on June 22, 2022 at 9:30 am (see attached letter).

  RWC normally receives the engineer report within 10-14 from the date of the inspection. RWC will then make a coverage determination based on the engineer's findings and the warranty standards.

  If I can be of additional assistance, please let me know.  Deborah C**************, Esq. Associate General Counsel/Director of Warranty Risk Management 

*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. ↩