To Donate Click Here

Suing Akum


I had a home warranty (with an Akum company). I paid them $33 a month and whenever an appliance in my house malfunctioned, they would send down a technician, who I would pay $45, and if the repair met their qualifications, they would pay for it.
A few months ago my air conditoner broke. I called them, they sent someone down (an Akum), and he said it was completely broken due to its age and would cost $4000 to replace. The warranty company said they wouldn’t pay for it because it broke due to my failure to maintain it. I pointed out that thats not what their technician said, they said they disagreed with him.
I decided to sue them for $4000.
Meanwhile, I hired my own technician (a Yid), who came and fixed it easily.
So, the techinician tried to rip off the warranty company, who tried to rip me off (pihem diber shav!), but, in truth, I didn’t suffer a significant loss bH.
May I still sue the warranty company for $4000 because, lemaaseh, they should have paid me that based on their technician’s report?
Thank you


You can sue them for the cost of the repair that the Yid made because they were supposed to repair it, and they didn’t, but you don’t have the right to take $4000 from them just because they said that it would cost that amount of money to fix, as it is not damage that you incurred. Besides according to what you wrote, the technician didn’t say that it would cost $4000 to repair, but $4000 to replace, which may not be within the warranty.

Best wishes

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

  1. The question isn’t clear about the $45 paid to the technician that comes down.
    Does the home warranty company normally reimburse their client for this amount, or is it like an insurance deductible, which the customer need to pay in any event?

    If the latter is correct, then to be more precise, the amount allowed to claimed from the home warranty company, would be the cost of the repair that the Yid made, MINUS $45, which the customer would have to pay anyway [= Total loss incurred by the customer due to the insurer not fulfilling its fiduciary duty].

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *