I would like to share my latest exchange with CHW because it summarizes the breadth and degree of difficulties one should expect with this company. Read below.
Dearest CHW:
The following are the principal reasons I am declining your offer of a Lowe's Gift Certificate in lieu of repairing my $10,500 Viking Double Oven.
(1) The last repair technician sent by CHW submitted a bid of approximately $1,500 to repair my Viking Double Oven. Why will you not allow this repair (which satisfies the contract and which I, your "Valued Customer," really want) in lieu of a $1,549 Lowe's Gift Certificate that I can't use?
(2) It is not possible to find a multifunction double wall oven at any store for anything close to $1,549. Hence, what precise methodology did you employ to determine $1,549 is the appropriate supportable replacement cost for my double oven? Further, how did CHW arrive at the pinpoint precision of your original offer of $1,081? Why not $1,080? Why not $81?
(3) CHW's valuation appears closer to the cost of two countertop toaster ovens instead of two multi-function built-in wall ovens. If you disagree, kindly reverse your decision to withhold the supporting documentation for how CHW arrived at a replacement cost of $1,549?
(4) Your frequent “Great News” notices to me announcing that I am now “eligible” for the incredible, seemingly bountiful “Replacement Offer” is a complete sham. It is presented as if I am the lucky recipient of an appliance cash replacement so that I can shop around and purchase any brand of double oven I want. The obvious sham is that neither CHW’s original, lucky “Great News” offer of $1,081 (which I rejected), nor CHW’s second “Great News” higher offer of $1,549 (also rejected), bear any relation to the cost of a new double oven.
(5) The last bona fide repair bid of $1,500 from CHW's own technician is substantially under CHW's maximum contract repair limit of $3,000. Why then is CHW unilaterally refusing to make this repair, especially when you heavily advertise that you will pay up to $3,000 per appliance regardless of the age of the appliance?
(6) Your Case Manager told me CHW believed repair of my 12-year-old Viking Double Oven was not cost-effective. Cost-effective for whom? My cost to replace in kind will be in excess of $10,000 while your cost to repair is $1,500.
(7) The nominal age of my oven may be 12 years old, however, I purchased this Viking Double Oven "brand new" when it was already four (4) years old and still unused in its original box. This means you would be repairing an eight-year-old double oven with an expected life expectancy of twenty years. Most any businessperson would agree this is highly cost-effective.
(8) There comes a point at which any decent company operating in good faith will acknowledge the harm done to its customer when making its decisions. By this I mean that since I filed my oven claim, CHW has had seven and one-half months, or 229 days, to repair my double oven, while I remain severely inconvenienced without a properly functioning oven. Furthermore, the inordinate delay in repairs has caused even more operating problems with the two ovens.
(9) In these 229 days, CHW has sent multiple repair technicians from its own approved repair network of companies. I can no longer access some of these company records and names, but the companies I remember CHW commissioned included: Cascade Home Appliance Repair, Brent Services, All Appliance Repair, Any Odd Jobs, A & E Factory Service, HVAC and Appliance Repair Guys, Brents Appliance Repair, Sear’s Appliance Repair/ Appliance Repair Technicians, Management Maintenance Services, Northwest Appliance Repair, and finally, JAS Appliance Service. None of these multiple bids from its own network repair technicians were acceptable to CHW. The last one, JAS Appliance Service, is the one whose repair bid of about $1,500, which you likewise rejected. I know neither the repair quotes from the other companies nor the reasons you rejected their bids. However, I am aghast at how many companies CHW believes it should be permitted to send to my house, schedule their repair visits over seven and one-half months (or perhaps longer because we are not done yet), disrupt my life to meet them at odd hours (they arrived as early as 7 am and as late as 9 pm) with this cavalcade of repairmen, pay each company $65 at a cost in excess of $500 for a single repair, refuse to reimburse me the payments above the contractual $65 requirement, uphold CHW’s Corporate Position that any and all refunds are my responsibility to recover from its repairmen, seriously impair my ability to cook and entertain over the major holidays and beyond, reject off-hand every single one of CHW’s own authorized repair bids without explanation, and in the end, simply decide to offer me a gift certificate?
(10) This is the least important argument, but I will mention it anyway because it is true. The valuation on this house is well over $2M but probably closer to $3M. Surely even you should understand that it is undercuts the value of any house to put cheap, albeit non-existent, below market replacement appliances in place of the originally purchased expensive appliances, even if someone could find such an appliance as inexpensively as CHW’s bald assertion. In sum, your non-supportable offer will force me to purchase another high-end, double oven appliance at a cost in the $10,000 range if I am to preserve the valuation of my property.
(11) CHW’s proffered Lowe’s gift certificate cannot purchase a replacement double oven which is what I need. CHW ‘s sole reason for rejection is it’s “non-cost-effective repair.” If CHW is correct, then my only alternative is that I must incur the “more cost-effective” replacement alternative. Why isn’t CHW warranty offering me its $3,000 contract amount?
(12) A Lowe’s $1,549 gift certificate cannot purchase a double oven, which is what I need. Rather, its value to me could only be used over a few years’ time to buy “little things,” e.g., lightbulbs, trash bags, paper towels, etc., all of which dilute the value of the certificate.
(13) Most important of all is the clear pattern of CHW’s multiple delays, denials, requests for new pictures of the appliance, demands for multiple diagnoses from the same vendor (which cheats the vendor because they must return again without pay for the extra work), insisting the customer spend inordinate amounts of time spent to make calls, answer notices, file written “appeals,” and wait around for CHW to respond. The frustration caused by CHW’s processes effectively causes me, your Valued Customer, to pay for the repairs directly and without reimbursement. I have already done this with several other claims I could have filed with CHW but decided not knowing the expected sad outcome.
For the reasons outlined above, will you kindly review your last offer with senior management and contact me with CHW’s final decision.
P.S. Yes, CHW is truly amazing!