A.A.S. Service, Inc.

Today I received your generated email regarding the complaint. I totally disagree with AAS Service reply. But I am sure the consumer will always be wrong and not intended to receive any consideration regardless. I will continue to warn via conversation and social media the type of treatment received to my friends and family not to trust AAS Service in any way.There was nothing more done than vacuum and reinstall the logs. Who climbs on a ladder of a home's chimney prior to introducing themselves at the door? Also, he told me we did not have buildup to what he could see. Sounds like he is contradicting himself as you probably usually has to because of his questionable practices. My husband did call and has phone records of his call to produce. He just chooses not to answer the calls he chooses, as he proved while at my home. When presented with a complaint, why didn't he call or contact us to try to come to an understanding? That would have been what honest people do.Thank you for your time, thank you.Warm Regards,*** ***
*** ** *** ***
***
*** *** ***
*** *** *** ***

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2016/01/28) */
(Revdex.com - converted from original document. See file.)
I am an attorney representing A.A.S. Service, Inc. ("AAS.") in connection with Case #[redacted]. Please direct all future correspondence concerning this matter to my attention at the above...

email address or to my office address. My client has requested that I contact your office in order to correct certain inaccurate and misleading factual allegations included in [redacted]'s January 23, 2016 Complaint Activity Report (the "Complaint"). This correspondence shall serve as AAS's response to the Complaint.
First, the complainant, Mr. [redacted] was not present at the home on October 12, 2015 when his wife, [redacted] approved of the work AAS performed on her behalf. Accordingly, every factual allegation made by Mr. [redacted] concerning the events of October 12, 2016 is complete hearsay.
AAS provided Mr. [redacted]'s wife, [redacted], with an estimate detailing all work it would perform and the corresponding costs. Ms. [redacted] agreed to the price before any work began. Ms. [redacted] signed a written contract with AAS on October 12, 2015. AAS performed extensive work at the home, including upstairs and downstairs level chimney sweeps, application of creosote treatment to both of Ms. [redacted]'s chimneys, and installed a mount cap, rain cap, animal guard, and damper, Further, AAS employees removed multiple bags of debris from Ms. [redacted]'s chimney. In all, AAS performed four-and-one-half (4.5) hours of labor at the home. Mr. [redacted], acknowledges the 30-pound bag of soot that resulted from the comprehensive chimney sweeping. Yet, Mr. [redacted] attempts to spin this fact in a negative light, alluding that it was somehow AAS's responsibility to additionally dispose of the bag. Disposal of waste was not included in the contracted for price, nor would such removal be considered standard practice in the industry.
There is no question that AAS performed the contracted for work at the agreed upon price. Moreover, there is no dispute that Ms. [redacted] and Mr. [redacted] have benefited from AAS's services. Speculative conversations with other chimney sweeping companics who did not inspect AAS's work are completely irrelevant to the work actually performed by AAS at a contracted for price. If Mr. [redacted] and Ms. [redacted] wanted to use an alternative chimney sweeping company, they were free to do so.
The Complaint is replete with self-serving and misleading statements amounting to nothing more than buyer's remorse. AAS is licensed to do business in the State of Ohio. Contrary to Mr. [redacted]'s insinuation, AAS is not required by law to be licensed by the Chimney Safety Institute of America ("CSIA"). The subsequent issue with the dampers that were apparently damaged by a tree service company, were not AAS's responsibility. However, AAS voluntarily came back out to the home and in good faith, fixed the dampers, AAS stands by the quality of its work and has also filed a response in opposition to the credit card charge-back, noted in the Complaint.
Please contact me immediately if I may provide any further information or documentation concerning this matter.
Very truly yours,
Jonathon *. G[redacted]
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 10, 2016/02/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Following is our response to Mr. S[redacted]'s attorney's remarks sent to the Revdex.com on January 28, 2016:
First, although my husband, [redacted], was not at home on October 12, 2015 when AAS first came to our home, the complaint we filed was written collaboratively by both of us, for the simple reason that [redacted] is the primary card-holder on the MasterCard that was charged for the work that was not done satisfactorily and for the chimney cap and damper for which we were overcharged. In addition, [redacted] was home and took part in the discussion that took place with Mr. S[redacted] on October 31, in which Mr. S[redacted] asserted that multiple applications of Cre-Away would be needed to remove the third-degree creosote built up in our chimneys.
The attorney's use of terms like "allegation" and "hearsay" are simply legalese in his attempt to not address the facts; namely, that we were grossly overcharged for materials, as well as for work (creosote removal) that was not completed.
Secondly, as previously stated in our original write-up, we were not provided with an estimate for the chimney cap and damper prior to their installation. Those costs were added to the original estimate paperwork (a copy of which was not provided to us) when I was presented with the final bill. The fact that Mr. S[redacted]'s attorney has chosen to focus on removal of the debris (ashes and soot that were in the fireplaces when AAS arrived), rather than on the misrepresentations, overcharges and failure to actually remove the creosote according to the information set forth in the brochure provided by AAS, is quite telling.
The statement that the dampers were "apparently damaged by a tree service company" is inaccurate. As previously explained, Mr. S[redacted] was given the choice of cutting back branches that were touching the chimney prior to installing the cap and damper, or returning to install them after the tree service company had done their work. He opted to install the cap and damper without removing the tree branches, resulting in the damper being displaced by the branches, necessitating his return on October 31 to remediate the ineffective installation he had performed on October 12.
We have already paid AAS $832.00 for their efforts, which we believe is more than generous in light of the facts. Given the work that was actually performed and the methodology employed, the time spent, and the materials used, we were grossly overcharged, which is why we are disputing the remaining $2006.90. We relied on Mr. S[redacted]'s expertise, professional integrity and personal honesty, and what he did was shoddy work and price-gouging at best, and actually constitutes fraud.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2016/02/16) */
(Revdex.com - converted from original document. See file.)
I am an attorney representing A.A.S. Service, Inc. ("AAS.") in connection with Case #[redacted]. I am writing in order to address the February 5, 2016 Revdex.com (the Revdex.com")rebuttal response of [redacted](the "Rebuttal"). Miss [redacted]'s husband, [redacted] (together with [redacted], the "Complainants"), filed a Complaint Activity Report (the "Complaint") on January 23, 2016. I sent a response letter on behalf of AAS to the Revdex.com on January 26, 2016, correcting numerous factual inaccuracies, providing full documentation, and noting the fact that Mr. [redacted] was not even for a majority of the subject events to which he complained. Like her husband's initial Complaint, Ms. [redacted]'s Rebuttal is chock-full of potentially damaging false statements and misleading assumptions.
Complainants cannot avoid the essential and indisputable facts: (1) they were provided an estimate detailing all services, labor, and material, that AAS would perform and provide; (2) AAS and Complainants entered into a contract for goods and services; (3) AAS performed its duties, in full, pursuant to the terms of the parties contract; (4) Complainants benefited from, and continue to benefit from, AAS's services, labor, and material; and (5) Complainants breached their contract with AAS by refusing to pay the contracted for and agreed upon price for the goods and services provided by AAS.
Two AAS representatives, Urs S[redacted] and his assistant Ryan, were witnesses to the facts at issue and can corroborate that AAS performed its contract in full. Complainants' refusal to pay the contracted for price is merely a case of buyer's remorse. Ms. [redacted] entered into a contract with AAS, then after conferring with Mr. [redacted], decided she was overcharged based on internet searches and speculative conversations with another chimney sweeping company. Complainants had the opportunity to hire a chimney sweeping company of their choice. Alternatively, Complainants could have purchased the requisite cleaning products, dampers, and caps over the internet and performed the work themselves. Instead Complainants hired AAS and do not want to pay for the approximately 4.5 hours of labor or the materials used in completing the agreed upon tasks. Complainants logic is analogous to a couple eating a steak dinner at Mortons, then discovering they could have eaten less expensively at McDonalds and refusing to pay the credit card bill, despite the fact that they ate the entire meal and all prices were clearly listed on the menu.
As AAS' representatives can confirm, Ms. [redacted] was provided an estimate of every portion of the job. Complainants were not overcharged and have no legal basis to dispute the methodology employed by AAS. The dampers were not damaged. AAS is not a tree service company and was under no obligation to trim any trees. AAS installed the cap and damper as instructed by Ms. [redacted]. Under Ohio Law, Complainants have breached their contract with AAS by failing to pay the agreed upon price for goods and services rendered.
Please contact me immediately if I may provide any further information or documentation concerning this matter.
Very Truly Yours,
Jonathan W. G[redacted]

I have reviewed the complaint filed with the Revdex.com against A.A.S. Service, Inc.AS the A.A.S. records indicate, an estimate was given to, and reviewed by [redacted] prior to, and accepted by, before any work being completed.Referring to the NFPA 211 code book, a Level 1 inspection reads as follows,...

"Readily accessible areas of chimney, structure, and flue: lack of obstruction or combustible deposits in the flue; basic appliance installation and connection." We did complete the inspection and provided chimney sweep services within the estimate of $79.95 for this service. The chimney was heavily coated in soot to the point where the Individual bricks could not be seen. The bricks where visible when we completed the chimney sweep services. My assistant did set up a ladder to visually inspect the top of the chimney as well, which is note required in a Level I Inspection, and determined that the chase cover was rusting and should be replaced soon. It was noted on the estimated that his item would need to be addressed as soon as possible.As for the gas fixture logs tune up, myself, and my assistant did remove the logs from the fire place and set them on the tarp to proceed with cleaning them. This process did take approximately 25-30 minutes. During this process I replaced four (4) components that were necessary for the logs to work properly and eliminate the chance of carbon build up.1 presented Ms. [redacted] with the estimate and explained what services I would provide to her, and received her approval, prior to any work being be completed. This estimated did include the $79.95 charge for the Chimney Sweep services, as well as $295 for the gas fixture tune up. Myself, and my assistant where there for approximately 50 minutes. This can be verified in my log book.I respectively ask that you review the estimate that has been signed by the customer. I do not discriminate against any of my customers. With this in mind, please review the positive feedback for A.A.S. Services, Inc. as posted on the Revdex.com website. 1 take pride in my services and treat each client with the upmost respect and consideration. A.A.S. Services does not appreciate the slanderous comments referring to "ripping people off' when they have a "nice home". I fully disclose the cost of the services with a written estimate prior to any work being completed.Also, she is stating that a call was made to me to discuss the work that was completed and the charges. I received no such phone call, nor did I receive any voice mails from Ms. [redacted]. Neither on my office phone, nor on my mobile phone. If her husband attempted to call me, he did not leave a message.I disagree with crediting back Ms. [redacted] the $295 for the gas fixture tune up. The chimney was swept, and the fire place fixture is now safe to operate without the dangers of carbon build up. Also, Ms. [redacted] is contradicting herself in her statement. She verbally disputed the $79.95 when she was presented with the total for the services. Now, she is asking for the $295 to be reimbursed. At time of service, she did pay the full amount of $404.95, which also included the 8% sales tax.