jdkirkk

No, they are not, but it was a very nice letter by a professional who pointed out a wheras not obvious to the causual consumer. It was in tone and content totally unlike the sophmoric missive from the dealer who was responsible for fixing the car in the first place.
It seems the "damages caused from the continued operation of the vehicle with parts missing in the rear suspension. The repairs were;therefore not eligible for coverage by the contract." I agree with that statement, and assume that in lawyerland if my family had been killed in an accident because the dealer service rep didn't do his job correctly, the same sentence would apply. I keep very accurate maintenance records, prefer to find a good mechanic who knows the car, and do not as a rule use warranties, but made an exception in this case because I didn't have any experience with Audi's, experience that I now have in spades.
I take from this episode Al's comment; "it wasn't the cars fault."
And, to be fair, at Al's suggestion he replaced some pieces on the front right corner and that was covered by warranty and paid by Fidelity to the tune of several hundred dollars. Even so, my Audi maintnance bill now is in Porsche territory and exceeds that of my wives MB.
Experience is a hard and expensive tutor.