Sign in

Jack of All Trades of Orange County

Sharing is caring! Have something to share about Jack of All Trades of Orange County? Use RevDex to write a review
Reviews Jack of All Trades of Orange County

Jack of All Trades of Orange County Reviews (11)

We are in receipt of the complaint from this customer regarding the water damage that occurred in her home on when she called in to explain what had happenedWe did install a vanity, vanity top and new faucets in the bathroom since it was a double vanity on If all the drains needed to be snaked as stated by [redacted] ***, there is a larger problem in the home that has nothing to do with the faucet in the bathroom or the drain in the kitchen With regards to the statement the we do not have handymen that are licensed plumbers and that our business card lists plumbing as a professional service, she would be correct that we are not licensed plumbers, since we are a handyman serviceWe are not required to be licensed plumbers and have never told her that we areOur business cards, website or employees do not state that we are licensed plumbers at allPlumbing is listed as a service we provide within the confines of small jobs or maintenance, for which we are not required to be licensedWe are however insured with a registered business license as required but the state within which we operate

The business has responded Please see below:
We are in receipt of the additional concerns that were submittedWe have attempted to come to a resolution with the customer regarding thisWhen the job was completed on 3/**/15, the customer inspected the bookcase-storage unit, was satisfied and paid the remaining balance in full and tipped the service techThe next day she contacted Cathy at the office and notified us that she felt the unit was not smooth enoughThe service tech went back the same day she called and put an additional coat of polyurethane in one area for her to check and see if that was satisfactoryThe customer called back again on 3/23/and felt there were additional items that she was unhappy withShe said that the smoothness was better where the additional polyurethane was put on, but was unhappy with the graining of the wood and the stain colorThe customer requested oak for the unit and gave us a color chart with the marked stain color that she choseWe used red oak and the stain color that was chosen by the customerRed oak has natural graining, unfortunately the customer was not happy with the graining nor the color, all of which she choseWhen the service tech went to her home on 3/**/and spent a number of hours with her to make changes that would be acceptable to her, she agreed to have the back of the middle section of the unit removed and left open to the wall, she agreed to have the shelves in the side sections stained to a different color that she chose and she wanted to have a different wood with less graining on the back of the side sections put inWe agreed to do all of these itemsThe service tech removed the back middle section as agreed and he took the shelves with him so he could stain them to the newly agreed color, he also removed the crown moulding so as to add a return as agreed with the customer and he took the lid to the storage section so as to adjust it to not fit so snugAll of these things were agreed to on 3/**/The customer called the next day wanting to know when we will be there to remove the unitEverything was agreed to for changes she wanted due to her not liking the graining or the stain color and for the lid to be adjusted and a return crown moulding addedWe have always been willing and still are to come and do the items that were agreed to on 3/**/15, but the customer is now refusing to maintain that agreement and instead is insisting on the unit being removedThe only reason part of the unit was removed was to make the changes as agreed to by the customerWe are still willing to come and make the changes as agreed if the customer will allow us to do what was agreed to on 3/**/

The business has responded.  Please see below:
We did an estimate for this customer on 1/**/15 to build and install a bookcase - storage unit in upstairs hallway. The estimate was...

mailed to her on the same date and on 2/*/15 the customer called to schedule for the work to proceed. We received a $1500.00 deposit from the customer on 2/**/15 and the job was scheduled to be done on site on 3/**/15. The bookcase - storage unit was mostly pre-build not at the customers home. On 3/**/15 we came to the customers home and installed the bookcase - storage unit in the upstairs hallway and did all of the final work on site. Once the service tech was done, the customer looked at the bookshelf - storage unit and was satisfied. She paid the remaining balance due and signed the contract and the service tech left. The customer called the next day saying the she felt the bookshelf - storage unit was not smooth and requested we come back. The service tech went back on 3/**/15, the same day the customer called to look at the bookshelf - storage unit. The customer was not home at the time, so the service tech was let in by her husband. The service tech put an additional coat of polyurethane on the bookshelf - storage unit in one area so that the customer could check and decide if that was acceptable. The customer called back on 3/**/15 to say that she had other issues with the bookshelf - storage unit. I discussed at length with her what the concerns were and she said she did not like the graining on the wood or the stain color. I explained to her that she wanted oak, which is what was used. We used red oak boards, trim and cabinet grade red oak plywood and that oak has graining which is not controlled by us. Also the stain color that was used was the specific color that the customer chose and gave us the color chart for. She also said that there was missing crown moulding, the storage lid was scraping on one side, bookshelf - storage unit was not smooth and that there was a crack in the wood. I specifically asked about the smoothness of the cabinet where the service tech had applied the additional coat of polyurethane and she said that is was better. I scheduled with the customer for the service tech to come back on 3/**/15, when she was home, and look at all of t he aforementioned concerns and correct any necessary issues. The service tech went to her home on 3/**/15 and spent a number of hours going over the concerns she had. He explained to her that the graining of the wood cannot be changed since it is red oak and has graining. They agreed that since she now didn't want that much graining, that the back of the middle section of the unit would be removed. She didn't want to remove the back of the side sections but instead wanted different wood with less graining in the back of the 2 side sections. The service tech agreed to do that. The customer wanted the shelves in the 2 side sections stained a different color. The service tech stained a sample with a different stain color while at her home and the customer agreed to the change from the sample. With regards to the crown moulding being missing, there were no missing pieces, the customer just wanted a return on one side of the crown moulding at the top of the bookshelf - storage unit which the service tech agreed to do. The crack in the wood was a seam where the red oak trim met the edge of the lid for the storage section, which the service tech agreed to fix and the lid needed to be adjusted to not be so snug on one side. The service tech left with the shelves so as to re-stain them a different color as agreed, the lid for the storage section so as to repair the seam where the trim is and the crown moulding so as to stain the return piece the same color. The customer called back on 3/**/15, the day after the service tech was there and agreed to the changes she wanted, and she demanded that the unit be removed from her home. I tried to explain to the customer that this was a custom built bookshelf - storage unit and that it is not merchandise that can be returned. Unfortunately the customer kept demanding that the unit be removed immediately and I was unable to discuss the agreement that was made with the service tech. The service tech called her on multiple occasions to discuss the concerns and she only demanded that the unit be removed from her home. Calls were made by the service tech on 3/**/15, 3/**/15 and 3/**/15 and she kept insisting that the unit be removed. Both the service tech and myself have tried to discuss the changes she agreed to so that we can move forward and do them, however the customer is only willing to have the unit removed. We have sent a letter to the customer explaining that we would be willing to come back and do the changes as agreed to by her and the service tech on 3/**/15. To address some specifics in the complaint, the customer states "It did not look like what was discussed (crown moulding was supposed to be on the top of the unit, the bench portion was suppose to sit on the floor not be above it, fluted moulding was not on the angled section of bench..a cornice section on the top the unit that followed the angle of the bench etc.)". There was crown moulding at the top as the pictures we have show of the completed unit, the bench portion has a toe kick under it since it is in the middle section of the bookshelf - storage unit and needs to be there so that the cabinet doors on either side of the unit do not scrape the floor and there is no fluted moulding at all since it was not discussed or ever mentioned on the contract and the section on the top of the unit could not follow the angle of the bench below since it would have covered a vent on the ceiling. The customer states, "the mitered corners of wood do not even meet, ther e are cracks in the wood,..". The only seam that was shown to the service tech was where the trim met the edge of the storage lid which he agreed to fix. There are no cracks in the wood and the service tech was not shown any mitered corners that were not acceptable. The customer states, "The wood used is not furniture grade it's plywood...the grain of the wood is unsightly, and the grain on the unit goes in different directions,". The wood and trim that was used is red oak and the back larger section was made from red oak cabinet grade plywood for which we have the receipts to show what was purchased. We cannot control the grain of the wood, the customer wanted oak, which is what was used and the graining is consistent. The customer states "The color is not what was shown to [redacted]". The color chart that the customer gave us with the color she wanted marked and signed for was what was purchased and used to stain the bookshelf - storage unit . The customer also states "He removed a good portion of the unit to repair. It is beyond repairing". This is incorrect since she acknowledges he took the parts to repair as agreed and yet now it is not repairable. All of the agreed upon items can still be done if she would allow him to come back and do them as agreed. The customer also stated "He asked me what I wanted him to do and I requested a refund.". This would not be correct since she stated earlier that he removed a good portion to repair, so why would he be repairing anything if she was requiring a refund? The only thing that the customer keeps stating on every phone call she has made to us or we have made to her is that she wants us to remove the unit from her home immediately. We are still willing to come and make the changes the customer wants and as she agreed to on 3/**/15.

In response to the initial complaint and the additional response from the customer, there are discrepancies.In the initial complaint the customer listed the product that she said she wanted as being the IceJax II and in the additional response she claims that she requested the IceJax, as stated in her letter "I requested the IceJax. The identical cleat in the larger size is the IceJax II, which I would have accepted." She is claiming she wanted 2 different products when she never even showed the service technician the IceJax or IceJax II product at all, but instead showed him the Snowblox product, which is what was ordered. There are 2 sizes of the Snowblox cleat and we ordered the larger version based upon the Manufacturer's recommendation due to snow load for the state of New York. When I discussed it with her, she said she didn't want the larger version because it looked cheap and I explained to her if she chose to use the smaller version that she would need more of them since it was not designed for the higher snow load. She never once said that she had wanted a completely different cleat from what was ordered, she only stated that she showed the service tech the smaller version of the snow cleat that was ordered and that is what she wanted. The customer also states in her initial complaint that, "The incorrect guards were much larger on the surface where they would be visible," That is also not correct since the IceJax and IceJax II has a larger surface area than the Snowblox guards. She is claiming she wanted 2 different guards between her 2 letters with incorrect information regarding them.The customer claims in her initial complaint that I told her that the Snowblox guards are the only guards that could be used on her house by law because of the snow load in New York State. I never made any such assertion. When she did not like the larger version of the Snowblox guard and told me she had wanted the smaller version, I explained to her that the larger version was recommended by the manufacturer based upon the snow load for New York state. She was never told she couldn't use another guard, instead we offered to let her choose a different guard of her choice without restocking fees. If the IceJax or IceJax II had been what she wanted, she could have exchanged the ones that were ordered for those. She chose not to accept that offer. The customer claims that if we had used the online tool we could have determined that the cleat she wanted could have been used. While we never told the customer she couldn't use another cleat, the online tool is of no value to this argument. The online tool is available to help establish how many cleats are needed based upon the choice of cleat chosen and roof size. We also did order the item she showed us, in the larger version based upon snow load, we never said or acknowledged that we ordered the wrong product since we did order what we were showed.The customer also states, "The information regarding timing of my dispute with my credit card is irrelevant." This is false since I spoke with the customer on 10/*/14 and gave her the options that were offered to us by the Manufacturer of no restocking fees to change out to any other guard of her choice or to pay the restocking fee due to the product being listed as a special order item on her estimate and invoice. While we do not offer refunds of any kind on special order items as this was listed on her estimate and invoice, we opted to try and work with this customer and that is why we spoke with the Manufacturer to broker the offer that was made. She asked me to please wait until 10/**/14 so she could discuss it with her husband before making a decision and I waited until 10/**/14 before she called back and asked me to return the guards to the manufacturer. She had however already filed a chargeback with her credit card company on 10/**/14 having the payment reversed. We waited in good faith for her to make a decision, as she requested, while she was filing for credit card charges to be reversed, without our knowledge of her actions.We have done all we can to offer the customer the ability to choose another snow guard of her choice without restocking fees and the customer is changing her story on what guard she even wanted and claiming we told her she could only use the guard we ordered. The customer chose not to accept the offer of another cleat of her choice and instead called and told me to return the guards to the Manufacturer knowing there was a restocking fee, as she acknowledges in her initial complaint.

We are in receipt of the complaint from this customer regarding the water damage that occurred in her home on 8/*/14.
We did speak with [redacted] on Monday 8/*/14 when she called in to explain what had happened. We did install a vanity, vanity top and 2 new faucets in the bathroom...

since it was a double vanity on 8/*/13. We did not replace any of the plumbing, only the new faucets were hooked up to the existing plumbing in the bathroom. The complaint states that the new faucets were not properly installed and that the new faucet drain had a gap between the p pipe from the faucet. If there had been a gap of any kind between the faucet and plumbing, water would have been running from the moment of installation. These faucets have been installed and operating for a year now. [redacted] explained that only 1 of the faucets was leaking and that her husband had snaked all the drains in their home the day before and while they were brushing their teeth, the leak occurred.
As explained to [redacted] when she called, damage could have been caused by snaking the drains and would have nothing to do with the install of the faucets at all. It is also impossible to have so much water run from the drain to cause enough damage to destroy the vanity, the entire ceiling below and the oriental rug on the floor in the room below, without noticing. 
[redacted] stated that her husband had snaked all the drains in their home right before this occurred. To be able to snake the drain in the bathroom, either the faucet drain or the existing plumbing had to be taken apart to get access. If everything was not put back together properly, multiple issues could occur or damage could be caused. [redacted] also states in her complaint that the kitchen drain that we installed does not drain. We have never been notified of this until we received this complaint and the installation was done 3/*/14. If all the drains needed to be snaked as stated by [redacted], there is a larger problem in the home that has nothing to do with the faucet in the bathroom or the drain in the kitchen.
With regards to the statement the we do not have handymen that are licensed plumbers and that our business card lists plumbing as a professional service, she would be correct that we are not licensed plumbers, since we are a handyman service. We are not required to be licensed plumbers and have never told her that we are. Our business cards, website or employees do not state that we are licensed plumbers at all. Plumbing is listed as a service we provide within the confines of small jobs or maintenance, for which we are not required to be licensed. We are however insured with a registered business license as required but the state within which we operate.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

on 3-**-15 [redacted] the service tech for Jack of All trades owned by [redacted] came to my home to look at the complaints with the unit he "custom built". this unit is very poor construction, not worth anywhere near the $3448.21 that I paid for it. I should him all the problems and asked what he was going to do.. His response was" I do not know". I told him I wanted a full refund and the item removed from my home. he said he needed to speak with [redacted] since she is the [redacted], and that they don't give refunds..as the [redacted] I would think [redacted] would come and look at this herself, but she has refused.She expects me to deal with the person that built this mess and thought it was good enough to deliver!   I should be able to deal with someone who has the authority to make a decision upon inspection of the unit. she only knows what the service tech/ husband is telling her. she insists I have crown moulding, I do not. I have sent her photos to prove this.I also sent her phots of the uneven angles etc. I just do not understand why she will not look at this.. hHer version in the reply on the 3-**-15 meeting is simply untrue. Other than the fact that he removed some of the unit to bring back to the shop, I did not ask for that. I asked to remove all of it and issue a Refund in full, I have no trust that he can make this unit look like the piece of furniture [redacted] told me he was capable of building.
I was misled by [redacted] / Jack of all Trades as to his ability to do more than the basic handyman service.. if this was more than a one man company I would have options as far as having a person look at the problems and make a decision on it, not a husband and wife team where the husband can't make a decision and the wife refuses to take responsibility for this really poorly made product and just keeps telling me all the things she won't do and tries  bully me.I should be able to deal with some one at a company other than the person who made the mess. I have sent her a very detailed letter with all of the problems and photos..The only resolution to this is a full refund..
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

The business has responded.  Please see below:
When the service technician came out to the customer for an estimate, the customer showed him the picture of the clear snow cleat she...

wanted, on her iPad on the Snowblox website. The snow cleat she showed him came in 2 sizes based upon snow load. The cleats are identical except for the width of the cleat. The same cleat that was shown to the service tech was ordered from the website given by the customer and based upon the location of the home being in NY State and the average snow load as per the Manufacturer's specifications. When the service tech arrived on 10/*/14, the customer did not like the snow cleat and specifically did not like the criss cross pattern on the cleat. When she called the office and spoke with me, I explained to her that the cleat was identical but that as per the Manufacturer's specifications, the wider version was ordered due to snow load based upon location. She felt that the cleats looked cheap and she did not like them. I told her that I would speak with the service tech and the manufacturer and call her back. I called her back on 10/*/14 and let her know that the Manufacturer was willing to take back the snow cleats and she could order another snow cleat of her choice without any additional charges. She was very unwilling to do this and so I explained to her that if she did not choose another snow cleat that we could still return the snow cleats but that there would be a restocking fee from the Manufacturer. Usually we do not do refunds of any kind on special order items as these were specified on her contract, but in an attempt to work this out with the customer and find her a product she would be happy with, we tried to work with her. She said that she would like to discuss it with her husband and would call back with a decision by 10/**/14. On 10/**/14 the customer filed a complaint with her credit card company to have the charges disputed which was only the deposit she had made up until then. She called us back on 10/**/14 and said that she wanted us to return the snow cleats to the Manufacturer and did not want to choose another snow cleat. I reminded her that there would be charges of the restocking fee and shipping and she said she knew. The snow cleats were returned to the Manufacturer the next day and a letter was sent to the customer on 11/*/14 explaining all the charges and a refund of the overpayment she had made.

Review: Had Jack of All Trades install new vanity and fawcets in my home. Fawcets came undone after snaking drains causing new vanity to be ruined. Also, ceiling in dining room needs new sheet rock and oriental rug is water stained. Hired a licensed plumber to come in. New fawcets were not properly installed. Since new vanity is highger than old one, the new fawcet drain had a gap between p pipe and pipe from faucet. Instead of adding an extension, Jack of All Trades pushed p pipe up and screwed it on.

I recently had them insall new drains in kitchen and one does not drain. Jack of all Trades do not have handymen that are licensed plumbers. Their business card lists plumbing as one of their "professional services".Desired Settlement: I want to be refunded for new vanity, installation and cost of repair for dining room ceiling and oriental rug

Business

Response:

We are in receipt of the complaint from this customer regarding the water damage that occurred in her home on 8/*/14.

We did speak with [redacted] on Monday 8/*/14 when she called in to explain what had happened. We did install a vanity, vanity top and 2 new faucets in the bathroom since it was a double vanity on 8/*/13. We did not replace any of the plumbing, only the new faucets were hooked up to the existing plumbing in the bathroom. The complaint states that the new faucets were not properly installed and that the new faucet drain had a gap between the p pipe from the faucet. If there had been a gap of any kind between the faucet and plumbing, water would have been running from the moment of installation. These faucets have been installed and operating for a year now. [redacted] explained that only 1 of the faucets was leaking and that her husband had snaked all the drains in their home the day before and while they were brushing their teeth, the leak occurred.

As explained to [redacted] when she called, damage could have been caused by snaking the drains and would have nothing to do with the install of the faucets at all. It is also impossible to have so much water run from the drain to cause enough damage to destroy the vanity, the entire ceiling below and the oriental rug on the floor in the room below, without noticing.

[redacted] stated that her husband had snaked all the drains in their home right before this occurred. To be able to snake the drain in the bathroom, either the faucet drain or the existing plumbing had to be taken apart to get access. If everything was not put back together properly, multiple issues could occur or damage could be caused. [redacted] also states in her complaint that the kitchen drain that we installed does not drain. We have never been notified of this until we received this complaint and the installation was done 3/*/14. If all the drains needed to be snaked as stated by [redacted], there is a larger problem in the home that has nothing to do with the faucet in the bathroom or the drain in the kitchen.

With regards to the statement the we do not have handymen that are licensed plumbers and that our business card lists plumbing as a professional service, she would be correct that we are not licensed plumbers, since we are a handyman service. We are not required to be licensed plumbers and have never told her that we are. Our business cards, website or employees do not state that we are licensed plumbers at all. Plumbing is listed as a service we provide within the confines of small jobs or maintenance, for which we are not required to be licensed. We are however insured with a registered business license as required but the state within which we operate.

Review: I wish I could select a number of the issues in your drop down selection when being asked the nature of my complaint, but being limited to just one, I will select the most egregious: an unauthorized charge of my credit card. Jack of All Trades of Orange County LLC was hired to do numerous tasks at my home. They arrived on time on 4/**/12 and completed the majority of work in the first two days, however, a motion sensor was not working properly, and a stair railing installation and bathroom faucet repair were not complete as agreed. Upon receiving an invoice on 5/*/13 charging me for this work that was not complete or functioning properly, I immediately emailed the company directly at 9:24pm stating the work was not complete and that I would contact them "immediately thereafter to pay the final balance." I received no answer to my email. I emailed them again at 9:15am on 5/*/13 asking when the work would be completed, once again I received no reply from the company answering my question. On 5/*/13 I finally received an email from the company, but only stating that they had charged my credit card in full. This despite a portion of the work not functioning properly and other items not being done at all. They had obviously filed my credit card number information from when I paid my deposit, and then ran the balance without my written or verbal authorization. I immediately contacted the company via email and telephone to state my unhappiness with the situation. To compound the problem, when I confronted them about this behavior, they then began a series of fabrications in letters to me, including one in particular, where they had the shocking ability to state I had given them authorization. This was/is blatantly untrue and quite disturbing. Another fabrication was that they could no longer fix my faucet as agreed, but were instead charging me an $80 diagnostic fee, and they spoke to me about it. This was never brought to my attention, they never even called to discuss. They just charged my card $80 for something that was never discussed prior. I have all necessary supporting documentation including emails and letters and am fully willing to share them if necessary to support this statement. To get closure so both parties could move on, I asked for a full refund on the stair installation that was not done ($95), a partial refund on the malfunctioning motion sensor ($75), and a refund on the phantom "diagnostic" charge to my shower faucet they never fixed as agreed nor discussed with me ($80). After a month of fighting to get my own money back, that they took without my authorization, they sent me a partial refund of $102.71 but are still holding my money for work either not functioning or agreed to.Desired Settlement: There are other issues and specific examples, but at this point I simply want back what is mine: funds they have taken for work not agreed to or not functioning. I maintain the company owes me additional refund equal to 147.29. I remain stunned that Jack of All Trades will not simply do the right thing and refund me for work that was not agreed to and/or not functioning. Coming back to the house to complete the work is not an option, I have absolutely zero trust in putting them back in my home.

Business

Response:

Attached please find a copy of your letter we received dated June **, 2013. Please note that we did not receive this letter until July **, 2013 which was mailed on 7/**/13 as per the post stamp on the envelope.

After careful review of the complaint we would like to respond to all complaints accordingly. The customer has stated that an unauthorized charge of his credit card was processed for the work that was done at his home at [redacted]. The customer gave us his credit card information on 4/**/13 for a down payment towards the work that was scheduled to be done on5/**/13 & 5/**/13 and he authorized the office to keep the information for final payment once the job was complete. The work was performed on both [redacted] and [redacted] and final payment was processed on 5/**/13 for the balance. The customer could not have emailed on 5/**/13 complaining about a charge that was not processed until 5/**/13. We have the credit card receipts to show the relevant dates if needed. We contacted the customer back each time he called or emailed and had to leave messages constantly. The only time he did not receive a call back was on weekends such as 5/*/13 and 5/*/13, since we responded on 5/*/13 as stated. The customer does acknowledge

in his email dated 5/**/13 that he has received our messages, but that he has been out of town. The customer was not ignored as indicated in the complaint.

With regards to the items mentioned that were not complete, the customer made us aware of the issues he was having with the motion sensor a few days later and the service tech went over to check it out and reset it and it was working betore he left. The customer notified us on 5/**/13 via email that the sensor was still not working and that he would like to have it changed to a standard wall switch. We let him know multiple times that we would change it over to a standard wall switch and credit him the cost of the defective sensor. The customer has refused to retum the defective sensor to us so we can return it to the manufacturer for refimd and therefore we cannot give him a credit for the defective product while he is keeping it and refiJsing to let us have it back.

On the first day, [redacted] the service tech spoke with [redacted] regarding the installation of the stair rail that the customer was providing and he asked the service tech if he could paint it before we installed it. The service tech said that he would prep everything for the installation which was done and that the customer just had to call us once it was painted to have it installed. The only reason the final attachment of the railing

was not done was because the customer never called back to let us know that he had painted it. We did in the

interest of trying to work this out refund the customer in full for this job even though half of the work was already done tor it He received and accepted our refund in the amount of $102.71.

The bathroom faucet was leaking and the service tech was going to repair the faucet in the amount of $120.00. Upon taking the bathtub faucet apart, there were multiple issues that he found. Upon further investigation he discovered that the bathtub faucet had been installed incorrectly which was causing the trouble and that it was not repairable because of the incorrect installation. We did not install this faucet at any time. Due to what he found, the tech lowered the cost from $120.00 to $80.00 to cover the time he spent having to diagnose the problem. The tech explained this to the customer. The tech also spoke with the customer on the phone on 5/**/13@ 9:11 am to discuss this charge again and also to remind [redacted] that the railing would be installed once he painted it as the customer had requested. The tech also told the customer that the faucet would have to be replaced due to the incorrect installation and gave him a price of$240.00 for the instal!. We emailed the customer an estimate on the same day for the install in the amount of $240.00 plus the cost of the faucet. We received an email from the customer on 5/**/13 wanting to proceed with the laucet install and he stated "The more I've thought about it, the more it does not sit well with me to pay $80.00 to have something nor done as originally agreed." This indicates that be was aware of the charge and he also stated that he wanted to proceed with the faucet install. The customer was scheduled for 6/*/13 to have the work done. We agreed to remove the defective sensor on the same day and to do the linal install of the railing provided it was painted.

On 5/**/13 the customer called to verify the schedule date of 6/*/13 for the faucet install, final install of railing and change out of defective sensor to a regular wall switch. He again requested a refund for the diagnostic fee and it was explained to him again, why he would not be receiving a refund for us to spend time diagnosing the problem on his faucet that was installed inconectly. He would not accept the answer we kept giving him and cancelled the schedule date for the work to be done and completed. We have sent him 2 letters letting him know that we would be happy to give him a refund for the defective sensor if he would just allow us to have it back and he refuses to let us have it. We cannot reftmd him money for something he is keeping. Since the diagnostic fee was known to the customer, we are unable to refund money for sometlling that was done.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions.

Thanking you,

Review: On 1-**-15 I sent a deposit of $1500.00 to Jack of All Trades to have a bookcase/bench area custom built for my home. I had 1st inquired it while [redacted] of Jack of All Trades was at my home doing minor handyman jobs. I have used him several times since moving into my new home. I was always satisfied with the work performed and even when I spoke to him about his vehicle leaking oil onto my driveway and would he please park on the street in the future, he was understanding.

When he said he could build a custom unit I was thrilled, he asked that I call the office and have [redacted] come out and measure the space and give me some design ideas, she did and we agreed to the style of the custom made piece.

On 3-**-15 [redacted] came to install the unit. It did not look like what was discussed(crown moulding was suppose to be on the top of unit, the bench portion was suppose to sit on the floor not be above it, fluted moulding was not on the angled section of bench and many other design elements are missing, a cornice section on the top the unit that followed the angle of the bench etc.) Not only was the design not what was discussed the quality is terrible. The unit is so poorly constructed that the mitered corners of wood do not even meet, there are cracks in the wood, it does not fit snugly to the walls, the finish on the unit is so rough you can get splinters, the bench was also not level, one side was lower than the other. The wood used is not furniture grade it's plywood you buy in [redacted] or [redacted] the grain of the wood is unsightly, and the grain on the unit goes in all different directions, one piece will go up and down, the next sideways. The color is not what was shown to [redacted] and many other issues with this unit.

[redacted] did come back on 3-**-15 and listen to my complaints. He removed a good portion of the unit to repair. It is beyond repairing. He asked me what I wanted him to do and I requested a refund. The total paid was $3448.21. I waited for [redacted] to call and tell me what he was going to do and he just kept saying he does not know. Again I want a refund and him to pick up the rest of the unit.

He told me I needed to speak with [redacted] as she is the [redacted]. I spoke with [redacted] and requested they pick up the item and issue me a refund, she said "no that's not going to happen". I have called her numerous times and asked if I could come to her office and discuss this with her. Her response was we can do this over the phone, I can not come to her office and she also refused to come to my home and look at this mess.

What kind of business [redacted] is not willing to look at the item and quality of the workmanship? I have been calling their office everyday, unless I block my phone number my calls go to voice mail and no one returns my calls. When I do get her on the phone she just says "NO I'M NOT ISSUING A REFUND OR COMING TO LOOK AT IT" I went to the New Windsor Town Court to look into filing a small claims lawsuit, they were very kind there, as they know her very well and explained to me that I need to file in [redacted] since that is actually the town she lives in. I thought before I did that I would like to see if you can help me to get resolution to this matter.Desired Settlement: Complete and prompt refund and the remainder of the unit picked up and removed from my home.

Business

Response:

The business has responded. Please see below:We did an estimate for this customer on 1/**/15 to build and install a bookcase - storage unit in upstairs hallway. The estimate was mailed to her on the same date and on 2/*/15 the customer called to schedule for the work to proceed. We received a $1500.00 deposit from the customer on 2/**/15 and the job was scheduled to be done on site on 3/**/15. The bookcase - storage unit was mostly pre-build not at the customers home. On 3/**/15 we came to the customers home and installed the bookcase - storage unit in the upstairs hallway and did all of the final work on site. Once the service tech was done, the customer looked at the bookshelf - storage unit and was satisfied. She paid the remaining balance due and signed the contract and the service tech left. The customer called the next day saying the she felt the bookshelf - storage unit was not smooth and requested we come back. The service tech went back on 3/**/15, the same day the customer called to look at the bookshelf - storage unit. The customer was not home at the time, so the service tech was let in by her husband. The service tech put an additional coat of polyurethane on the bookshelf - storage unit in one area so that the customer could check and decide if that was acceptable. The customer called back on 3/**/15 to say that she had other issues with the bookshelf - storage unit. I discussed at length with her what the concerns were and she said she did not like the graining on the wood or the stain color. I explained to her that she wanted oak, which is what was used. We used red oak boards, trim and cabinet grade red oak plywood and that oak has graining which is not controlled by us. Also the stain color that was used was the specific color that the customer chose and gave us the color chart for. She also said that there was missing crown moulding, the storage lid was scraping on one side, bookshelf - storage unit was not smooth and that there was a crack in the wood. I specifically asked about the smoothness of the cabinet where the service tech had applied the additional coat of polyurethane and she said that is was better. I scheduled with the customer for the service tech to come back on 3/**/15, when she was home, and look at all of t he aforementioned concerns and correct any necessary issues. The service tech went to her home on 3/**/15 and spent a number of hours going over the concerns she had. He explained to her that the graining of the wood cannot be changed since it is red oak and has graining. They agreed that since she now didn't want that much graining, that the back of the middle section of the unit would be removed. She didn't want to remove the back of the side sections but instead wanted different wood with less graining in the back of the 2 side sections. The service tech agreed to do that. The customer wanted the shelves in the 2 side sections stained a different color. The service tech stained a sample with a different stain color while at her home and the customer agreed to the change from the sample. With regards to the crown moulding being missing, there were no missing pieces, the customer just wanted a return on one side of the crown moulding at the top of the bookshelf - storage unit which the service tech agreed to do. The crack in the wood was a seam where the red oak trim met the edge of the lid for the storage section, which the service tech agreed to fix and the lid needed to be adjusted to not be so snug on one side. The service tech left with the shelves so as to re-stain them a different color as agreed, the lid for the storage section so as to repair the seam where the trim is and the crown moulding so as to stain the return piece the same color. The customer called back on 3/**/15, the day after the service tech was there and agreed to the changes she wanted, and she demanded that the unit be removed from her home. I tried to explain to the customer that this was a custom built bookshelf - storage unit and that it is not merchandise that can be returned. Unfortunately the customer kept demanding that the unit be removed immediately and I was unable to discuss the agreement that was made with the service tech. The service tech called her on multiple occasions to discuss the concerns and she only demanded that the unit be removed from her home. Calls were made by the service tech on 3/**/15, 3/**/15 and 3/**/15 and she kept insisting that the unit be removed. Both the service tech and myself have tried to discuss the changes she agreed to so that we can move forward and do them, however the customer is only willing to have the unit removed. We have sent a letter to the customer explaining that we would be willing to come back and do the changes as agreed to by her and the service tech on 3/**/15. To address some specifics in the complaint, the customer states "It did not look like what was discussed (crown moulding was supposed to be on the top of the unit, the bench portion was suppose to sit on the floor not be above it, fluted moulding was not on the angled section of bench..a cornice section on the top the unit that followed the angle of the bench etc.)". There was crown moulding at the top as the pictures we have show of the completed unit, the bench portion has a toe kick under it since it is in the middle section of the bookshelf - storage unit and needs to be there so that the cabinet doors on either side of the unit do not scrape the floor and there is no fluted moulding at all since it was not discussed or ever mentioned on the contract and the section on the top of the unit could not follow the angle of the bench below since it would have covered a vent on the ceiling. The customer states, "the mitered corners of wood do not even meet, ther e are cracks in the wood,..". The only seam that was shown to the service tech was where the trim met the edge of the storage lid which he agreed to fix. There are no cracks in the wood and the service tech was not shown any mitered corners that were not acceptable. The customer states, "The wood used is not furniture grade it's plywood...the grain of the wood is unsightly, and the grain on the unit goes in different directions,". The wood and trim that was used is red oak and the back larger section was made from red oak cabinet grade plywood for which we have the receipts to show what was purchased. We cannot control the grain of the wood, the customer wanted oak, which is what was used and the graining is consistent. The customer states "The color is not what was shown to [redacted]". The color chart that the customer gave us with the color she wanted marked and signed for was what was purchased and used to stain the bookshelf - storage unit . The customer also states "He removed a good portion of the unit to repair. It is beyond repairing". This is incorrect since she acknowledges he took the parts to repair as agreed and yet now it is not repairable. All of the agreed upon items can still be done if she would allow him to come back and do them as agreed. The customer also stated "He asked me what I wanted him to do and I requested a refund.". This would not be correct since she stated earlier that he removed a good portion to repair, so why would he be repairing anything if she was requiring a refund? The only thing that the customer keeps stating on every phone call she has made to us or we have made to her is that she wants us to remove the unit from her home immediately. We are still willing to come and make the changes the customer wants and as she agreed to on 3/**/15.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

on 3-**-15 [redacted] the service tech for Jack of All trades owned by [redacted] came to my home to look at the complaints with the unit he "custom built". this unit is very poor construction, not worth anywhere near the $3448.21 that I paid for it. I should him all the problems and asked what he was going to do.. His response was" I do not know". I told him I wanted a full refund and the item removed from my home. he said he needed to speak with [redacted] since she is the [redacted], and that they don't give refunds..as the [redacted] I would think [redacted] would come and look at this herself, but she has refused.She expects me to deal with the person that built this mess and thought it was good enough to deliver! I should be able to deal with someone who has the authority to make a decision upon inspection of the unit. she only knows what the service tech/ husband is telling her. she insists I have crown moulding, I do not. I have sent her photos to prove this.I also sent her phots of the uneven angles etc. I just do not understand why she will not look at this.. hHer version in the reply on the 3-**-15 meeting is simply untrue. Other than the fact that he removed some of the unit to bring back to the shop, I did not ask for that. I asked to remove all of it and issue a Refund in full, I have no trust that he can make this unit look like the piece of furniture [redacted] told me he was capable of building.

I was misled by [redacted] / Jack of all Trades as to his ability to do more than the basic handyman service.. if this was more than a one man company I would have options as far as having a person look at the problems and make a decision on it, not a husband and wife team where the husband can't make a decision and the wife refuses to take responsibility for this really poorly made product and just keeps telling me all the things she won't do and tries bully me.I should be able to deal with some one at a company other than the person who made the mess. I have sent her a very detailed letter with all of the problems and photos..The only resolution to this is a full refund..

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

The business has responded. Please see below:We are in receipt of the additional concerns that were submitted. We have attempted to come to a resolution with the customer regarding this. When the job was completed on 3/**/15, the customer inspected the bookcase-storage unit, was satisfied and paid the remaining balance in full and tipped the service tech. The next day she contacted Cathy at the office and notified us that she felt the unit was not smooth enough. The service tech went back the same day she called and put an additional coat of polyurethane in one area for her to check and see if that was satisfactory. The customer called back again on 3/23/15 and felt there were additional items that she was unhappy with. She said that the smoothness was better where the additional polyurethane was put on, but was unhappy with the graining of the wood and the stain color. The customer requested oak for the unit and gave us a color chart with the marked stain color that she chose. We used red oak and the stain color that was chosen by the customer. Red oak has natural graining, unfortunately the customer was not happy with the graining nor the color, all of which she chose. When the service tech went to her home on 3/**/15 and spent a number of hours with her to make changes that would be acceptable to her, she agreed to have the back of the middle section of the unit removed and left open to the wall, she agreed to have the shelves in the side sections stained to a different color that she chose and she wanted to have a different wood with less graining on the back of the 2 side sections put in. We agreed to do all of these items. The service tech removed the back middle section as agreed and he took the shelves with him so he could stain them to the newly agreed color, he also removed the crown moulding so as to add a return as agreed with the customer and he took the lid to the storage section so as to adjust it to not fit so snug. All of these things were agreed to on 3/**/15. The customer called the next day wanting to know when we will be there to remove the unit. Everything was agreed to for changes she wanted due to her not liking the graining or the stain color and for the lid to be adjusted and a return crown moulding added. We have always been willing and still are to come and do the items that were agreed to on 3/**/15, but the customer is now refusing to maintain that agreement and instead is insisting on the unit being removed. The only reason part of the unit was removed was to make the changes as agreed to by the customer. We are still willing to come and make the changes as agreed if the customer will allow us to do what was agreed to on 3/**/15.

Review: 1 – Jack of All Trades ordered a different Snow Guard from what their technician and [redacted]) and I agreed to when he came to my house for a quote. Because the item was only specified on the quote as a "Snow guard clear", my credit card company had to uphold the charges during dispute resolution. The Credit Card Company has since suggested that I file a complaint with the Revdex.com.

2 – Jack of All Trades ([redacted]) gave me a detailed explanation of why they could not order the snow guard that [redacted] and I agreed to during consultation. When I proved to her that the guard I had selected would have worked, she changed her story when submitting facts to my credit card company and claimed that I told them exactly what to order.

3 – They did not use the planning tool required by the manufacturer to obtain the correct snow guard. Had they completed it, they would have seen that the snow guards that I requested would have worked. They gave me an estimate in bad faith. Additionally, they ordered 100 snow guards and the respective amount of glue, when only 50 snow guards were needed for my roof, charging much more than they should have for the supplies.

Detailed summary of events:

In early September, [redacted] came to my house to provide an estimate for various services that we needed to complete on our house. One of the services was to install snow guards on the metal roof of our front porch. At that time, I showed him the ones that we wanted. I mentioned to [redacted] that we would prefer a more ornamental snow guards but had not been able to locate any that could be glued down. If he was able to find something to match the roof, we would be open to an ornamental guard as long as it did not require screws in the metal roof. When we received the quote, I contacted [redacted] in the Jack of All Trades office. [redacted] told me that they could not find the ornamental guards that could be glued down, so the quote included the clear guards that [redacted] and I discussed. At no time was I told that the guards in the quote were not the ones that [redacted] and I agreed to, so I paid the deposit for the work to be completed, assuming that the snow guards were the ones that I wanted.

When [redacted] came to my home to do all the work, I was surprised to see the snow guards ordered were not the ones we agreed to. [redacted] laid them on the roof so that I could see what they would look like once glued down, and I disapproved. The incorrect guards were much larger on the surface where they would be visible, and they were not smooth, but instead had a criss-cross pattern making them look cheap.

[redacted] immediately called the supplier and asked questions about the order. When he left, he told me that we “were even” as far as charges. I went back in the house and looked at the quote. The amount of work completed that day was only $285 worth of work, so I called the Jack of All Trades office and spoke with the other [redacted]. She told me that I was responsible by contract to pay for “down time” in the amount of $90 and that I’d be obligated to pay for the restocking fee and shipping charges to return the items because it was special order. I informed her that the snow guards [redacted] brought to my house were not the ones that we had agreed to during consultation, so I should not be obligated to pay for any associated fees because it was their mistake. She told me she would have to talk with [redacted] and [redacted] to find out what happened and call me back the next day.

The next day, [redacted] told me that she had a more accurate cost for the restocking fee, and that I would have to pay the additional $135 plus shipping. I objected again, stating that she is charging me for their mistake in ordering supplies that I had not agreed to. [redacted] stated the reason they ordered something different from what [redacted] and I agreed to was that the [redacted] at Snowblox told her that the Snowblox Ace are the only guards that could be used on our house by law because of the snow load in New York State. First, there is no law governing this. Additionally, I had previously talked with the very same [redacted] who confirmed that the IceJax II guards, which is what I wanted, could have been used for our roof. She then stated that the ones I wanted would have been much more expensive because they would have required twice the number of snow guards to provide the same protection. Again, I told her she was mistaken. The [redacted] at Snowblox had previously told me that they always suggest that customers complete a planning tool to get the right estimate for supplies on snowtool.com. I completed the worksheet with our porch roof’s dimensions, pitch, and snow load of 50 psf and found that not only could the snow guards that I originally selected be used, but that it was the same quantity required as the snow guard that Jack of All Trades incorrectly ordered. And, when Jack of All Trades place the order for the incorrect guards, they ordered TWICE the number recommended, which was over $200 of product not needed for my roof.

[redacted] and her team clearly did not use the tool, so they provided an estimate in bad faith, and then tried to justify ordering the wrong product to me verbally. This is dishonest.

In this most unpleasant exchange, I told [redacted] that it was incomprehensible that they would charge a customer for their mistake. [redacted] continued to hold her stance that because the snow guards were a special order, I had no recourse. They did not use the appropriate tool, ordered the wrong snow guard, and ordered two-times the number needed for my roof.

To top it off, during the dispute processing with my credit card company, she changed her story and claimed that they ordered what I wanted. The conversations above were not taped, so I have no way to prove that [redacted] is lying.

The credit card representative, while sympathetic to the situation, had to uphold the charge because the quote did not specify which snow guard should have been ordered and because the discussions between me and Jack of All Trades were verbal. They recommended that I file a complaint with the Revdex.com.Desired Settlement: I want a refund of $241.26 that represents the return shipping costs and the downtime fee that Jack of All Trades has assessed to me.

Business

Response:

The business has responded. Please see below:When the service technician came out to the customer for an estimate, the customer showed him the picture of the clear snow cleat she wanted, on her iPad on the Snowblox website. The snow cleat she showed him came in 2 sizes based upon snow load. The cleats are identical except for the width of the cleat. The same cleat that was shown to the service tech was ordered from the website given by the customer and based upon the location of the home being in NY State and the average snow load as per the Manufacturer's specifications. When the service tech arrived on 10/*/14, the customer did not like the snow cleat and specifically did not like the criss cross pattern on the cleat. When she called the office and spoke with me, I explained to her that the cleat was identical but that as per the Manufacturer's specifications, the wider version was ordered due to snow load based upon location. She felt that the cleats looked cheap and she did not like them. I told her that I would speak with the service tech and the manufacturer and call her back. I called her back on 10/*/14 and let her know that the Manufacturer was willing to take back the snow cleats and she could order another snow cleat of her choice without any additional charges. She was very unwilling to do this and so I explained to her that if she did not choose another snow cleat that we could still return the snow cleats but that there would be a restocking fee from the Manufacturer. Usually we do not do refunds of any kind on special order items as these were specified on her contract, but in an attempt to work this out with the customer and find her a product she would be happy with, we tried to work with her. She said that she would like to discuss it with her husband and would call back with a decision by 10/**/14. On 10/**/14 the customer filed a complaint with her credit card company to have the charges disputed which was only the deposit she had made up until then. She called us back on 10/**/14 and said that she wanted us to return the snow cleats to the Manufacturer and did not want to choose another snow cleat. I reminded her that there would be charges of the restocking fee and shipping and she said she knew. The snow cleats were returned to the Manufacturer the next day and a letter was sent to the customer on 11/*/14 explaining all the charges and a refund of the overpayment she had made.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

The business states that they ordered the snow cleats that I requested but in a larger size. This is not true. I requested the IceJax. The identical cleat in the larger size is the IceJaxII, which I would have accepted. The business ordered a cleat called SnoBlox, which is a completely different design. (Please visit www.snoblox.com where you will see that the two cleats are completely different in design.)The business claimed that they ordered based on manufacturer’s guidelines. This is also false. The manufacturer clearly states both verbally and on their website that all purchasers should use their online tool to determine the correct cleat based on the roof dimensions, pitch and snow load. I had completed the tool and KNEW that theone I selected was sufficient for my roof. The business did not measure my roof during the time of my quote because I had selected the product. When deciding on their own to change the order, they did not complete the online tool, so they ended up ordering the wrong product, too many cleats and too much glue, while paying higher shipping charges.In her response to you, the business stated that on 10/*/14, she offered to exchange to product at no additional cost to me. Again, she is omitting the fact that she told me I would still have to pay for the shipping charges both ways for the exchange and for the downtime for the day when I refused installation of the wrong product. Again, they are pushing the cost of their mistake onto me and not telling the whole truth of the situation to try to paint a picture for their benefit.The information regarding timing of my dispute with my credit card is irrelevant. This business:1 - ordered the wrong product2 – acknowledges that they did not order what I expected without my knowledge3 –never has apologized for doing so4 - and has expected me to pay for all associated charges for restocking, shipping and downtime, whether it was for a return or an exchange. The amount that I dispute, $241.26, has already been charged to my credit card and paid by me. It represents only the fees that the business passed onto me for their mistake.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

In response to the initial complaint and the additional response from the customer, there are discrepancies.In the initial complaint the customer listed the product that she said she wanted as being the IceJax II and in the additional response she claims that she requested the IceJax, as stated in her letter "I requested the IceJax. The identical cleat in the larger size is the IceJax II, which I would have accepted." She is claiming she wanted 2 different products when she never even showed the service technician the IceJax or IceJax II product at all, but instead showed him the Snowblox product, which is what was ordered. There are 2 sizes of the Snowblox cleat and we ordered the larger version based upon the Manufacturer's recommendation due to snow load for the state of New York. When I discussed it with her, she said she didn't want the larger version because it looked cheap and I explained to her if she chose to use the smaller version that she would need more of them since it was not designed for the higher snow load. She never once said that she had wanted a completely different cleat from what was ordered, she only stated that she showed the service tech the smaller version of the snow cleat that was ordered and that is what she wanted. The customer also states in her initial complaint that, "The incorrect guards were much larger on the surface where they would be visible," That is also not correct since the IceJax and IceJax II has a larger surface area than the Snowblox guards. She is claiming she wanted 2 different guards between her 2 letters with incorrect information regarding them.The customer claims in her initial complaint that I told her that the Snowblox guards are the only guards that could be used on her house by law because of the snow load in New York State. I never made any such assertion. When she did not like the larger version of the Snowblox guard and told me she had wanted the smaller version, I explained to her that the larger version was recommended by the manufacturer based upon the snow load for New York state. She was never told she couldn't use another guard, instead we offered to let her choose a different guard of her choice without restocking fees. If the IceJax or IceJax II had been what she wanted, she could have exchanged the ones that were ordered for those. She chose not to accept that offer. The customer claims that if we had used the online tool we could have determined that the cleat she wanted could have been used. While we never told the customer she couldn't use another cleat, the online tool is of no value to this argument. The online tool is available to help establish how many cleats are needed based upon the choice of cleat chosen and roof size. We also did order the item she showed us, in the larger version based upon snow load, we never said or acknowledged that we ordered the wrong product since we did order what we were showed.The customer also states, "The information regarding timing of my dispute with my credit card is irrelevant." This is false since I spoke with the customer on 10/*/14 and gave her the options that were offered to us by the Manufacturer of no restocking fees to change out to any other guard of her choice or to pay the restocking fee due to the product being listed as a special order item on her estimate and invoice. While we do not offer refunds of any kind on special order items as this was listed on her estimate and invoice, we opted to try and work with this customer and that is why we spoke with the Manufacturer to broker the offer that was made. She asked me to please wait until 10/**/14 so she could discuss it with her husband before making a decision and I waited until 10/**/14 before she called back and asked me to return the guards to the manufacturer. She had however already filed a chargeback with her credit card company on 10/**/14 having the payment reversed. We waited in good faith for her to make a decision, as she requested, while she was filing for credit card charges to be reversed, without our knowledge of her actions.We have done all we can to offer the customer the ability to choose another snow guard of her choice without restocking fees and the customer is changing her story on what guard she even wanted and claiming we told her she could only use the guard we ordered. The customer chose not to accept the offer of another cleat of her choice and instead called and told me to return the guards to the Manufacturer knowing there was a restocking fee, as she acknowledges in her initial complaint.

Check fields!

Write a review of Jack of All Trades of Orange County LLC

Satisfaction rating
 
 
 
 
 
Upload here Increase visibility and credibility of your review by
adding a photo
Submit your review

Jack of All Trades of Orange County Rating

Overall satisfaction rating

Description: HANDYMAN SERVICES

Address: PO Box 650, Cornwall, New York, United States, 12518

Phone:

Show more...

Add contact information for Jack of All Trades of Orange County

Add new contacts
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | New | Updated