If you are not sure call our office. If you are looking for a reputable service contract company go to our website and contact one of the “PREFERRED PARTNERS” that we have checked out for you. (www.ohiada.org) The companies who are represented on our website are not just fully insured but they support the OIADA every year so that we can continue to provide programs and events for you, our members.

States sue auto service contract marketers National Auto Warranty Service and Auto One Warranty
By Sheryl Harris, The Plain Dealer
April 29, 2010, 5:44 PM

Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray today sued three marketers of extended auto service contracts who wracked up complaints from Ohio consumers.  Cordray filed suits in Franklin County against Missouri-based U.S. Fidelis (USF), formerly National Auto Warranty Services and Dealer Services; and California-based Credexx Corporation, dba Auto OneWarranty Specialists (Auto One). Auto One reportedly closed its doors last month.

Cordray’s suits allege USF and Auto One mislead consumers into believing the extended service contracts they sold offered “bumper to bumper” coverage when they did not. Consumers, the attorney general’s office
said, often had difficulty collecting refunds when they canceled contracts.

Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin also sued USF the same day. Idaho, Kansas, North Carolina and Washington filed suits against Auto One.

Cordray also filed a separate suit in Cuyahoga County against Cleveland-based Auto Repair Warranty Inc. (ARW). ARW has gone out of business, leaving consumers with service contracts that have no value,
Cordray said.

The Ohio suits accuse all three companies of multiple violations of Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act, including failure to disclose important terms and conditions, failure to deliver and misrepresentation.

No, you cannot use the FTC Sicker for that purpose. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act covers written warranties and requires manufacturers and sellers of consumer products to provide consumers with detailed information about the warranty coverage for those products. The Act requires the written warranty to disclose: specific information, clearly and conspicuously, in a single document, using simple and readily understood language