Complaint Review: Consumer Priority Services - Brooklyn new York

I have a claim with CPS for my LG Gas Range Model LG LSG4513ST.  I was required by CPS to pay a $99 deductible based on the MSRP to get the claim started, I was not previously informed of any such requirement and the warranty does not indicate any payment to initiate a claim. 

After two trips by a Service Advisor to try to fix the Gas Range and being told that the part needed to repair the Gas Range was no longer available I then received two emails from CPS in August stating and re-stating that a settlement offer has been initiated. 

The warranty does not speak to reimbursement, or in this case partial reimbursement, only repair or replacement.  The settlement offer was 32% of the MSRP.  I sent an email to CPS stating that I rejected the settlement offer, together with the reasons for the rejection.  I then had had a phone call with a customer service representative regarding the claim. 

The Customer Service Rep (CSR) told me that the settlement offer was based on the purchase price of the LG Gas Range less the amount of money spent to remedy the issue with the Gas Range.  Again, the warranty does not speak to reimbursement and also does not speak to subtracting any amounts from reimbursement in a settlement offer. 

The warranty speaks to repair or replacement. My position is reimbursement in place of replacement must then be a whole reimbursement. The CSR told me that the company’s offer was handled in a way that was in line with the warranty that came with the Gas Range, as well as the applicable laws that relate to the handling of warranty repairs. 

The CSR did not state which laws apply to this claim and whether those laws are at the Federal level or are at the State level.  Nonetheless, my position, did not, change, I expected full reimbursement for all costs I incurred relating to my purchase of the LG Gas Range in substitute for a whole replacement.

I also reviewed the warranty, which I received with the Gas Range, I could not find any language that corroborates the comments made by the CSR. I could also not find any laws, either at the Federal level or at the State level, that would be applicable to this warranty claim and that would corroborate the comments made by the CSR. I then asked CPS to send me:

1.    Indicate on the Warranty document the specific language their CSR referred to which corroborates their statements.

2.    List the specific Federal and/or State statutes that the CSR referred to which corroborates their statements.

I have continued to ask for a resolution and continue to get the same less than satisfactory settlement offer. My concern also is if CPS replies to this complaint, they will simply request that I again contact the company. We are beyond this phase and that would be a further stall tactic.

It appears that Consumer Priority Services does not intend to uphold their warranty commitments.