Company Response
4/5/2022
Company's letter states: we are in receipt of your letter dated March 9, 2022, notifying us of the complaint your office received from customer in connection with a recent claim submitted under the terms, conditions, limitation, and exclusions of the above-referenced POWERLIFE LIMITED WARRANTY CONTRACT ("PLWC"). In accordance with your request, we ask that you accept this letter containing important information regarding that claim, the concerns expressed by customer and the PLCW provided at no cost to customer by Wesley Chapel Nissan ("WCN"). As a preliminary matter, please understand that as the PLWC Administrator, our office was appointed by WCN to perform these function of administering claims presented under the PLWC's terms, condition, limitation and exclusions. In that capacity, we are not responsible to fulfill any obligation to repair or replace components, provide coverage, or issue benefits of any kind. In addition, "NO PERSON HAS THE AUTORITY TO CHANGE THIS LIMITED WARRANTY OR TO WAIVE ANY OF ITS PROVISIONS."
Unfortunately, per terms, conditions, limitations, and exclusion of the PLWC, the recent claim was not eligible for coverage due to the following:
1) To qualify for repairs or replacements under the PLWC, proof of timely performance of all scheduled maintenance was recommended by customer's vehicle manufacturer and or as may otherwise be specified in Section B of the PWC entitled "YOUR RESPONSIBILITES" must be kept by customer and furnished to the administrator upon request.
2) A diligent review of the documentation submitted on consumer's behalf to support performance of the manufacturer recommended and/or PLWC required maintenance, reveals omissions and/or excesses beyond the PLWC established grace period for such maintenance intervals.
3) Among those missing or late services which also exceed the PLWC's 30/da1,500-mile grace periods, include the engine air filter replacement Cosnumer acknowledges and which Nissan Specifies is to be performed at each 30,000-mile odometer interval, engine oil and filter replacement(s) performed beyond Nissan's 6 month/5,000-Mile interval between the odometer readings of 105,110 miles and 117,250 miles etc.
4) Section D (9) of the PLWC entitled "WHAT IS NOT COVERED", specifically excludes "Any costs if verifiable receipts as required in section "B. YOU RESPONSIBILTITIES" are not furnished on request"
We understand that customer complaint that he believes that PLWC terms can be sent aside on the basis of a volunteered opinion that one or another example of the non-compliance may not be directly related to the breakdown diagnosed during a particular claim. However, such a theory is clearly not supported by the PLWC, since it explicitly established that customer "...must provide proof that all recommended services have been completed under YOUR VEHICLE Owner's Guide, including verifiable receipts showing date and mileage of the VEHICLE at the time of such service must be presented in order to have repairs begun on YOUR VEHICLE (Emphasis added) there is simply no express, implied, or even speculative condition that consumer's responsibilities as stipulated on section B, or any other portion of the PLWC, are subject to unilateral revision, dismissal, or waiver; and there is no provision which allows for the application of the theory that coverage eligibility may be selectively altered depending on which verifiable receipts exist, which are missing, and/or which are late of the PLWC's established "grace "period. Moreover, we must remember that PLWC is provided by customers selling dealer and designed to be in effect for as long as his vehicle ownership lasts--subject to an adherence with the PLWC's terms and conditions, of course. If such an unwarranted precedent were set what extra-contractual waiver requests might the Administrator expect in the event one of more future service records also prove elusive? Would the Administration then be again called upon to ignore those missing services as well, on the expanded theory the additional missing services may not have had a direct casual relationship to the future breakdown? If so, what of the already existing engine air filter or other shortcomings- should they, too, be again overlooked and ignored during such a future, as if PLWC requirements never existed at all? If the PLWC is to mean what it says, and if it says that the owner named in the Customer Information section of the PLWC "..must provide proof that all recommend services have been completed per YOUR VEHICLE Owner's Guide, including verifiable receipts showing data and mileage of the VEHICL at the time of such service must be presented in order to have repairs begun on YOUR VEHICLE", and it t further stipulated that "NO PERSON HAS THE AUTHORITUY TO CHANGE THIS LIMITED WARRANTY OR TO WAIVE ANY OF TIS PROVISIONS", under that pretext would the Administrator be authorized to do the opposite?
Read More