GoWarranty Bewertungen 

I’ve been a GoWarranty customer for some time. What impressed me recently was the way Sameer Shaikh, the CEO, personally stepped in when I raised concerns about my service experience.

He took the time to listen, acknowledged my concerns, apologised, and committed to addressing the issue. That level of personal accountability makes a difference and shows a willingness to take customer feedback seriously.

I also appreciated the clarity provided around warranty coverage and the effort to answer my questions before making a purchase decision.

No company is perfect, but how it responds when a customer raises a concern matters enormously. I appreciate Sameer and his team's approach and hope GoWarranty continues to build on this customer-first culture as it grows.

Nice service

GoWarranty: More Public PR Than Evidence and Legal Compliance

My experience with GoWarranty & Services LLP raises serious concerns about its approach to consumer grievances and judicial compliance.

- The Consumer Commission’s Order: The District Consumer Commission, Agra, passed an order dated 27.02.2026 directing GoWarranty to pay ₹24,060. Despite the order, the amount remains unpaid, and execution proceedings are pending.

- Public Statements Without Supporting Evidence: The company makes detailed statements about its internal records, policies, and legal position on public review platforms. However, these statements have not been accompanied by documentary evidence demonstrating compliance with the Commission’s order.

- Legal Compliance Over Public Image: Responding to Google reviews and stating that the legal team will address the matter cannot substitute for actual compliance with a judicial order. The company should explain what concrete steps it has taken and provide clarity regarding payment or any legally recognised challenge.

- Accountability and Transparency: Public relations responses may influence perception, but they do not resolve a consumer’s grievance. Evidence, accountability, and compliance with judicial directions are what matter.

Potential customers should carefully evaluate the company’s complaint-handling practices, documented responses, and approach to consumer orders before purchasing its services.

Buying a 3-year extended warranty plan from GoWarranty was a huge mistake. Their extended warranty is a complete gimmick, and they will look for any ridiculous loophole to escape fulfilling legitimate claims.
​My Haier washing machine stopped working, so I filed a claim. The official Haier engineer inspected the machine and clearly identified that the pressure sensor was damaged. But instead of honoring the plan, GoWarranty arbitrarily rejected my claim and closed my case!
​Their absurd logic? They claim the pressure sensor is a "plastic part" and therefore not covered! A pressure sensor is a vital functional electronic component required for the machine to run—not a cosmetic panel or outer shell. Calling a critical sensor a "plastic part" just to deny coverage is downright dishonest and deceptive.
​​To make matters worse, after I posted an honest 1-star review exposing their poor service, their staff and senior department heads started relentlessly calling and pressuring me to delete the review, demanding that I take a screenshot and email them proof!
​Instead of fixing my appliance or taking responsibility, they are actively harassing customers to scrub negative feedback from the internet. They care more about hiding their bad reputation than honoring the warranty you paid for.
Why sell extended warranties if you refuse to cover core internal functional parts when the machine breaks down? This company takes your money upfront and completely abandons you when you actually need support.
​Do NOT fall for GoWarranty's extended warranty traps. Save your money and stay away from this pathetic and untrustworthy service!

your reply reinforces my concern that the relevant facts are being selectively presented.

I would therefore request that you respond specifically to the following points:

Television Service Request – SR003112 / SR000835
Policy: GW_05EC0C878ABD

By your own admission, this service request was registered on 12 December 2025 and remains open.

You refer to multiple service partners, follow-ups, diagnostics and scheduling. However, the fundamental question remains unanswered:

What does your Service Assurance/Service Agreement provide for a service request that remains unresolved for this length of time?

More than eight months have now elapsed. Despite repeated assurances, no technician has actually attended the site to inspect and repair the television, and no replacement or equivalent compensation has been provided.

Please clarify what action GoWarranty has taken under its own Service Assurance obligations for a case that has remained pending for this period.

Refrigerator Service Requests – SR003463 & SR003768
Policy: GW_62F72AB21233

You state that the refrigerator complaints were "attended and processed" and that the latest request revealed that the product had been shifted from the originally registered service location.

This requires clarification.

You have previously serviced the refrigerator/appliances at the location where they are currently installed. The refrigerator has always been at this location.

Therefore, please clarify:

At what address was the refrigerator previously serviced?
When did GoWarranty first become aware of this location?
What specific term in the policy applicable on the date of purchase states that the appliance cannot be serviced at a location different from the invoice address?
Where does the policy require prior approval for such a location when the appliance has always been installed at the same residential address?
Why was this objection raised only after repeated follow-ups and delays?

You have yourself acknowledged that GoWarranty has previously provided service at this location, even though the invoice carries my office address. This makes your present position particularly difficult to understand.

I request that you provide the specific policy clause applicable to my plan rather than a general reference to "terms and conditions."

Air Conditioner Claim – SR002975
Policy: PN_37A29436A2EE

Here, my complaint is not that GoWarranty simply failed to respond.

My complaint is regarding the manner in which the product was sold and the subsequent handling of the claim.

Before purchasing the extended warranty, I clearly disclosed the age and history of the AC and specifically asked about its eligibility. I was told that the warranty could be provided on an exception basis and that a physical inspection was not required.

The policy was subsequently issued and activated.

When a claim was later raised, GoWarranty relied on the very condition of the appliance that had been disclosed at the time of sale to deny the claim.

This is a complaint of mis-selling and delayed/inconsistent claim handling, not merely a complaint about non-response.

The fact that GoWarranty has communicated with me does not resolve the issue. The question is whether the product sold, the commitments made, and the subsequent claim decision are consistent with each other.

Finally, your statement that I have purchased multiple plans and that some were previously serviced does not address the substance of my complaint.

I purchased these plans because I trusted GoWarranty to honour them when they were actually needed. The relevant test is therefore what happened when claims and service requests arose.

I request that GoWarranty respond to the specific questions above with the applicable policy terms and documented facts rather than a general statement that the matters are being handled within the terms and conditions.

My objective remains to have the facts placed on record accurately.

Great services provided the time of purchase of plan they helped out and provided some good offers
And later when raised a service request for my Ac resolved quickly

Great experience i have learnt a lot in Go warranty