Advertised vs Delivered
Customer service
Discounts and Special Offers
Diversity of Products or Services
Exchange, Refund and Cancellation Policy
Price Affordability
Product or Service Quality
Service Scheduling
Turnaround Time
Value for money

My wife and I entered into a contract for extended service on my 2009, Mercedes Benz GL450 vehicle on August 16, 2016. On December 2, 2016, we delivered this vehicle to Mercedes-Benz of Sugarland, 15625 SW FRWY, Sugarland, Texas 77478.

We dropped it off for regular maintenance and a problem with the radio volume and cruise control. It was discovered during the maintenance that the vehicle had numerous other problems of which, contrary to what we were led to believe were not covered. However, there were items that were covered; intake manifold runner, radio console, and a right front seat switch. The repair facility repaired the seat switch, manifold runner but did not repair or replace the radio console.

Warranty Direct stated that they were “Not sending a new, refurbished part to replace the radio console, but rather a used part.” This is not what I expected when purchasing the Warranty Direct extended warranty. Who replaces a part on a Mercedes Benz with a junk yard used part? When the repair facility received the used part it was locked and no password was provided. I called Warranty Direct claims and spoke with a person who said that they sent a new part, unlocked and with a password attached.

I know from my previous conversations with my repair facility that they contacted the supplier of the used part. That supplier stated that “they did not have the password because it was a used part.” They advised the repair facility to contact Mercedes Benz to see if they could get the password. The repair facility contacted Mercedes Benz which refused to give them the password “because we don’t know where that unit (radio console) came from and could be stolen.” Warranty Direct then stated again that they had sent a new part, which I know is not true. They told me they were NOT sending a new or refurbished part, but a used part.

And that the unit was sent unlocked and password was attached, which was also not true. So the repair facility took the used, locked and no password unit out of my vehicle, and replaced it with the unit I had in it before. My repair facility gave me daily updates and their progress or lack of progress with the company.

My vehicle went into the shop on December 2, 2016, and was not recovered by me until January 3, 2017. All that time was spent waiting for parts, arguing with Warranty Direct over coverage and the radio unit.

Product or Service Mentioned: Warranty Direct Auto Claim.

Reason of review: Warranty issue.

Monetary Loss: $2150.

Preferred solution: Let the company propose a solution.

I didn't like: Lied about coverage, Misrepresentation about coverage.

Do You Have Something To Say ?
Write a review


Terms of Service
Post Comment

You May Also Like