Heritage Warranty - EXTENDED WARRANTY SCAM, Gerhard's Autohaus Inc-Gerhard Noll, Rip-off Lincoln Nebraska

As is the case in most stories of this nature, some crucial facts have been ignored. Let's go over the claims one by one.

The initial claim filed was on 9/11/01 by Atlanta Classic Cars. The shop wanted to perform a nationally published Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) to repair a known problem with a transmission wiring harness. A manufacturer releases a TSB when they have announced responsibility for a common component failure. The only problem was that Atlanta Classic Cars wanted to charge 55 labor hours for a repair in which the TSB only called for 24 hours (this is a labor-intensive repair which requires disassembly of the dashboard). The customer was instructed to take the vehicle to a repair facility that was more in line with these parameters.

On 10/23/01, Heritage received a call from Gerhard's Auto. Only 11 miles had been put on the odometer since the previous repair. The mechanic at Gerhard's replaced shift solenoids located on the valve body of the transmission. Upon road test to make sure repairs were sufficient to release the vehicle, a 3" hole in the engine was created. Subsequent teardown of the engine was authorized by the customer to determine the cause of failure. Heritage sent out an independent, third party inspector to verify the cause and extent of damage to the vehicle. The vehicle had thrown a rod and created heavy damage to the engine. Upon inspection, the independent inspector noted heavy sludge buildup in the pan and oil pickup screen areas. The cause of failure had been determined as a lack of lubrication due to improper maintenance and evidence of a heavy sludge buildup.

The service contract that this customer obtained clearly states that oil must be changed at regular intervals as suggested by the manufacturer. With the extent of damage found in this vehicle and the subsequent report by an independent inspector, it was determined that Heritage was unable to participate in this claim. The choice of repair facility was up to the customer. The only reason she was initially instructed to take the vehicle elsewhere was because of the unreasonable labor requests of Atlanta Classic Cars.

As is the case in most stories of this nature, some crucial facts have been ignored. Let's go over the claims one by one.

The initial claim filed was on 9/11/01 by Atlanta Classic Cars. The shop wanted to perform a nationally published Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) to repair a known problem with a transmission wiring harness. A manufacturer releases a TSB when they have announced responsibility for a common component failure. The only problem was that Atlanta Classic Cars wanted to charge 55 labor hours for a repair in which the TSB only called for 24 hours (this is a labor-intensive repair which requires disassembly of the dashboard). The customer was instructed to take the vehicle to a repair facility that was more in line with these parameters.

On 10/23/01, Heritage received a call from Gerhard's Auto. Only 11 miles had been put on the odometer since the previous repair. The mechanic at Gerhard's replaced shift solenoids located on the valve body of the transmission. Upon road test to make sure repairs were sufficient to release the vehicle, a 3" hole in the engine was created. Subsequent teardown of the engine was authorized by the customer to determine the cause of failure. Heritage sent out an independent, third party inspector to verify the cause and extent of damage to the vehicle. The vehicle had thrown a rod and created heavy damage to the engine. Upon inspection, the independent inspector noted heavy sludge buildup in the pan and oil pickup screen areas. The cause of failure had been determined as a lack of lubrication due to improper maintenance and evidence of a heavy sludge buildup.

The service contract that this customer obtained clearly states that oil must be changed at regular intervals as suggested by the manufacturer. With the extent of damage found in this vehicle and the subsequent report by an independent inspector, it was determined that Heritage was unable to participate in this claim. The choice of repair facility was up to the customer. The only reason she was initially instructed to take the vehicle elsewhere was because of the unreasonable labor requests of Atlanta Classic Cars.

As is the case in most stories of this nature, some crucial facts have been ignored. Let's go over the claims one by one.

The initial claim filed was on 9/11/01 by Atlanta Classic Cars. The shop wanted to perform a nationally published Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) to repair a known problem with a transmission wiring harness. A manufacturer releases a TSB when they have announced responsibility for a common component failure. The only problem was that Atlanta Classic Cars wanted to charge 55 labor hours for a repair in which the TSB only called for 24 hours (this is a labor-intensive repair which requires disassembly of the dashboard). The customer was instructed to take the vehicle to a repair facility that was more in line with these parameters.

On 10/23/01, Heritage received a call from Gerhard's Auto. Only 11 miles had been put on the odometer since the previous repair. The mechanic at Gerhard's replaced shift solenoids located on the valve body of the transmission. Upon road test to make sure repairs were sufficient to release the vehicle, a 3" hole in the engine was created. Subsequent teardown of the engine was authorized by the customer to determine the cause of failure. Heritage sent out an independent, third party inspector to verify the cause and extent of damage to the vehicle. The vehicle had thrown a rod and created heavy damage to the engine. Upon inspection, the independent inspector noted heavy sludge buildup in the pan and oil pickup screen areas. The cause of failure had been determined as a lack of lubrication due to improper maintenance and evidence of a heavy sludge buildup.

The service contract that this customer obtained clearly states that oil must be changed at regular intervals as suggested by the manufacturer. With the extent of damage found in this vehicle and the subsequent report by an independent inspector, it was determined that Heritage was unable to participate in this claim. The choice of repair facility was up to the customer. The only reason she was initially instructed to take the vehicle elsewhere was because of the unreasonable labor requests of Atlanta Classic Cars.

As is the case in most stories of this nature, some crucial facts have been ignored. Let's go over the claims one by one.

The initial claim filed was on 9/11/01 by Atlanta Classic Cars. The shop wanted to perform a nationally published Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) to repair a known problem with a transmission wiring harness. A manufacturer releases a TSB when they have announced responsibility for a common component failure. The only problem was that Atlanta Classic Cars wanted to charge 55 labor hours for a repair in which the TSB only called for 24 hours (this is a labor-intensive repair which requires disassembly of the dashboard). The customer was instructed to take the vehicle to a repair facility that was more in line with these parameters.

On 10/23/01, Heritage received a call from Gerhard's Auto. Only 11 miles had been put on the odometer since the previous repair. The mechanic at Gerhard's replaced shift solenoids located on the valve body of the transmission. Upon road test to make sure repairs were sufficient to release the vehicle, a 3" hole in the engine was created. Subsequent teardown of the engine was authorized by the customer to determine the cause of failure. Heritage sent out an independent, third party inspector to verify the cause and extent of damage to the vehicle. The vehicle had thrown a rod and created heavy damage to the engine. Upon inspection, the independent inspector noted heavy sludge buildup in the pan and oil pickup screen areas. The cause of failure had been determined as a lack of lubrication due to improper maintenance and evidence of a heavy sludge buildup.

The service contract that this customer obtained clearly states that oil must be changed at regular intervals as suggested by the manufacturer. With the extent of damage found in this vehicle and the subsequent report by an independent inspector, it was determined that Heritage was unable to participate in this claim. The choice of repair facility was up to the customer. The only reason she was initially instructed to take the vehicle elsewhere was because of the unreasonable labor requests of Atlanta Classic Cars.