It is stated in the invoice that the reason for the additional time and charges are due to the amount and size of the rootsThe technician getting caught was not due to lack of experience; he had been cleaning the line for hour before the cable got caught in the lineIt is not true that he only attempted to pull on the cable; she was not there when we was running the machine back and forth over and over to free the cableIt is true that the second technician did determine that they needed to do more, because the cable was buried in tree rootsShe asked me if having technicians was necessary, and it wasFirstly, they needed to operate machines, and the main reason for technicians was safetyIn order to prevent the first technician from being hurt, a second technician was neededI did work with her on the cost and gave a discount of $I was not trying to charge her unnecessarily, and the discount I gave proves thatWhen we did the work years ago, we suggested that she would need it done yearly from then on, and she did not follow through, which contributed to the difficulty of this last visitIf you read the paperwork, you will see that what I am saying is true and what she is reporting is false
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 13, 2016/02/09) */
We have gathered all the information on the case with *** ***We are also sending a copy of the work order from DC ANNIS as well as the copy from Ron the sewer rat
*** called in on Christmas day with a main line back upWe
dispatched technician JohnJohn went to ***s house like we have in the past more than a few times
John worked diligently to get the massive amounts of roots that were in the lineHe was using a Dsize blade (the largest available) to clean the line correctlyThere were issues getting the blades in due to the amount of roots and possible offsetsHe went down in size of blade to try and get throughJohn was still having issues and suspected there was an offset causing more issuesJohn talked to the customer that he would need a camera to inspect or John could keep working but that would go into overtimeThe customer said he would get a camera at a later time and denied having extra time spent to adequately clean the lineThis is why we did not warranty the lineThe customer denied paying for extra time to get the line fully removed of rootsWhen you have older lines and your line gets offsets that leaves adequate space for roots to growWith not having his line cleaned 7/23/that gave the roots a lot of time to growThis is why we recommend to have your line cleaned on a yearly basis when you have an older line with a lot of tree rootsThis particular time they grew in massive amounts that would take longer than the one and a half hour that the $coversWe also did not even charge him the holiday rates as it was on Christmas dayHe was supposed to be charged $
When the customer called back, when the line had backed up again we advised him prior to coming out so there was no surprises that it would be chargeable as there was no warrantyWe did not warranty it because we advised of needing a camera or more time which the customer refusedWhen we advised the customer of this he became angryThe office staff offered to get his information over to the owner so that he can contact the customer and come to an agreement
Bob *** (owner of DC ANNIS) called *** to talk about situation and get more informationBob went over all the details with the customer and tried to explain the reasoning*** became even more upset and hung up on BobBob contacted the customer again and asked if it was fair to charge him half price*** refused and said he wanted all his money back or nothing and he would go to the Revdex.com
Bob requested a copy of the DVD provided from Ron the sewer rat, customer refusedWe had no proof as to what the customer was saying that the line is in good conditionBeing that it has offsets, it means it is not in good condition
We worked on the line for hour and minutes and pulled large amounts of roots outThe customer also notes that Ron the Sewer rat had to run line multiple time as wellMeaning there were massive amounts of roots, which would require additional time to complete which we were refused to do
We performed the $of work for one hour and minsWe should be paid for the work done
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 15, 2016/02/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not accept the response submitted on Feb9th, and would like to submit a rebuttalNothing mentioned in the response really affects the bottom line of my complaint, but I feel the need to clarify some of the "facts" mentioned in the responseI've attached a copy of the response with the "facts" I am rebutting numbered
1) The response says John tried several times to get the snake through the sewer, which is correct, but fails to mention that John(the technician)actually did get the 6" cutters all the way through the line on the 2nd tryThat fact is confirmed in John's write up on the work orderI asked him to run it through again to make sure there were no roots left behind and he couldn't do it
2) The response says I did not want John to continue working to remove all the roots from the line because it would go into overtimeThe fact is, John gave me every indication that the roots were all removed and he said the sewer was draining well, which he mentioned in the write upHe never mentioned, at any time, that there would be no warranty
3)The response states that the $lflat rate for the job is supposed to only cover only l-l/hours of workNow where on the work order does it say that, and that fact was never mentioned to me at any time, before, during, or after the work was doneI have no idea where that comes from4) There are several lies that are mentioned by Mr***First, he did not call me, I called him, after *** the *** *** did the work for me and I discovered that there really wasn't any big problem with my sewer, I called him requesting a refundSecond, he became belligerent and hung up on me, I didn't hang up on himThird, I never made any threats to him about contacting the Revdex.com
I only decided to complain to the Revdex.com after he hung up on meFourth, he never offered to return half the price, or anything at all for that matter.It's true that I refused to send him the DVD that was made by *** the *** *** but I did tell him he was free to look at the videoAlso, they did not pull "massive" amounts out of the lineThey have pulled more roots out of the line at other times when they were hereIn fact, *** the *** *** pulled out as much, or more, than John didI was actually somewhat surprised at the small amount that John removed, considering the trouble he seemed to be having
The bottom line is, I paid for the line to be cleaned and it was not cleaned, forcing me to pay someone else to do it, along with paying to have a camera run through ii, which would not have been necessary had it been cleaned properly the first time!
Oh February 09, 2016, the business provided the following information: We have gathered all the information on the case with *** ***We are also sending a copy of the work order from DC ANNIS as well as the copy from Ron the sewer rat
*** called in on Christmas day with a main line back upWe dispatched technician JohnJohn went to *** house like we have in the past more than a few times
John worked diligently to get the massive amounts of roots that were in the lineHe was using a Dsize blade (the largest available) to clean the line correctlyThere were issues getting the blades in due to the amount of roots and possible offsetsHe went down in size of blade to try and get through
John was still having issues and suspected there was an offset causing more issuesJohn talked to the customer that he would need a camera to inspect or John could keep working but that would go into overtimeThe customer said he would get a camera at a later time and denied having extra time spent to adequately clean the lineThis is why we did not warranty the lineThe customer denied paying for extra time to get the line fully removed of rootsWhen you have older lines and your line gets offsets that leaves adequate space for roots to grow
With not having his line cleaned 7/23/that gave the roots a lot of time to growThis is why we recommend to have your line cleaned on a yearly basis when you have an older line with a lot of tree rootsThis particular time they grew in massive amounts that would take longer than the one and a half hour that the $coversWe also did not even charge him the holiday rates as it was on Christmas dayHe was supposed to be charges $
When the customer called back, when the line had backed up again we advised him prior to coming out so there was no surprises that it would be chargeable as there was no warrantyWe did not warranty it because we advised of needing a camera or more time which the customer refusedWhen we advised the customer of this he became angryThe office staff offered to get his information over to the owner so that he can contact the customer and come to an agreement
Bob *** (owner of DC Annis) called *** to talk about situation and get more informationBob went over all the details with the customer and tried to explain the reasoning*** became even more upset and hung up on BobBob contacted the customer again and asked if it was fair to charge him half price*** refused and said he wanted all his money back or nothing and he would go to the Revdex.comBob requested a copy of the DVD provided from *** to *** *** customer refusedWe had no proof as to what the customer was saying that the line is in good conditionBeing that it has offsets, it means it is not in good condition
We worked on the line for hour and minutes and pulled large amounts of roots outThe customer also notes that *** the *** *** had to run line multiple time as wellMeaning there were massive amounts of roots, which would require additional time to complete which we were refused to do
We performed the $of work for on hour and minutes We should be paid for the work done
Final Business Response /* (4000, 17, 2016/02/18) */
We do not wish to go back and forth on the same information we will need to disagree at this pointThe responses that you have made, contradict what you have said in previous complaints with us or with the Revdex.com
We are still willing to settle this and refund you half of the moneyOur tech John did work for over an hour which should not be discredited and he should be paid for
Mr Smith can see there were still roots in the line which John asked for extra time and was deniedAt which point the other company of course was able to remove the rest of the roots in the time allotted for that company
To end this, again as we stated, we are still willing to work with the customerWe will refund 50% of his money
Please let us know if this can be resolved and we will get that back to you as soon as possible
Thank you
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 19, 2016/02/19) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Nothing I said in any response contradicts anything I said previously
I had to pay another company an additional $because D.CAnnis did not do what I hired them to doPartially cleaning the sewer line was of NO VALUE to me, therefore, I am entitled to a full refund
Thank you
I am rejecting this response because: The business did not really offer an acceptable answer for the excess hours and labor involvedIt is clear ro me, for many reasons that the first technician was not very experienced and got his equipment caughtHe did not use any technique to get free other than just pulling as hard as he couldThe second tech spent a minute or so of his time assisting Jesse this way before he realized this was not going to workI asked if it was really necessary for two techs to be present since only one was doing the workThe owner Bob said he would not allow his men to work alone for safety reasons which I find absurd for many reasonsI could have told the workers to leave after clearing their machine or even not allowed them to come into my home the following day but I was assured by owner Bob that he was going to “work with me” on the cost and I decided to give him the benefit of the doubtIn my opinion, Bob abused that trust and decided he was going to take me for whatever he could. Remember, DC Annis did the work only years ago and they did the job in an hour’s timeThis first job was after years or more of no maintenanceTo turn a $job into a $job is quite a trick and it was pretty clear to me that if the more experienced tech had been sent out first, this would have been an hour’s worth of work which is what time was actually spent clearing the weeds
It is stated in the invoice that the reason for the additional time and charges are due to the amount and size of the roots. The technician getting caught was not due to lack of experience; he had been cleaning the line for 1 hour before the cable got caught in the line. It is not true that he only attempted to pull on the cable; she was not there when we was running the machine back and forth over and over to free the cable. It is true that the second technician did determine that they needed to do more, because the cable was buried in tree roots. She asked me if having 2 technicians was necessary, and it was. Firstly, they needed to operate 2 machines, and the main reason for 2 technicians was safety. In order to prevent the first technician from being hurt, a second technician was needed. I did work with her on the cost and gave a discount of $160.00. I was not trying to charge her unnecessarily, and the discount I gave proves that. When we did the work 3 years ago, we suggested that she would need it done yearly from then on, and she did not follow through, which contributed to the difficulty of this last visit. If you read the paperwork, you will see that what I am saying is true and what she is reporting is false.
On Tuesday, April 25th at 1:42 p.m. [redacted] contacted our office to inquire about their shower drain and mainline backup. Jaysha, dispatcher, took all the pertinent information and scheduled the appointment for Wednesday the 25th between 12-5. [redacted] inquired about our pricing for a...
shower drain and was quoted $130 for the first hour, which normally gets the job done. However, there are times the shower drain can turn into needing the main line cleaned so [redacted] was also quoted $180 for the first 1 ½ hours up to 100 feet, which normally gets the job done. On Wednesday, April 25th our technician, Sean, arrived at the property at 3:10 p.m. Upon arrival Sean went over the paperwork and received customer’s signature prior to work being performed. Our paperwork’s verbiage states the following: The customer authorizes work and agrees to terms and conditions. They acknowledge and accept that aged and deteriorated plumbing fixtures, piping and appurtenances may no longer be serviceable and they agree to hold D.C. Annis Sewer blameless for any damage and destruction to those items as a result of cleaning efforts. D.C. Annis Sewer is not responsible for unforeseen or hidden problems and customer accepts risk that any mechanical snake used to attempt to clean or clear a drain pipe may contribute and/or cause leakage anywhere in the drain system. In the event of emergency and/or warranty services, D.C. Annis Sewer shall not be held liable for water damage or any other damage that may result in the interim. Our paperwork also states customer should not authorize and/or sign this work to be attempted if you do not agree with any part of this statement. It also states customer acknowledges that they are an authorized representative of the property and accept all terms as stated and/or intended. After receiving signature Sean began working, at which time a man and woman began arguing about prices. The disagreement continued while Sean was working and became heated, at that time the man was told to get out by the woman. In Sean’s statement he did the following: ran the cable from the floor clean out where there was standing water. He ran a D6 blade and got stuck at around 60 feet. He pulled the cable back and downsized it to a D4 blade. That blade also got stuck at roughly 60 feet. He pulled the cable back and found roots and a plastic like material. He ran the D4 blade again and got drainage for a brief moment. Customer ran water and it clogged back up again. Once again roots and a plastic like material was pulled back. The blades came back polished, which means there is a possible break in the pipe. Sean then downsized again to a sand auger and still couldn’t get past 60 feet. The customer told Sean the last company came out 3 + years ago, ran the smallest blades they had out of fear of breaking the pipe. By running the smallest blades the line was never getting properly cleaned. The customer argued that they always ran it from stack line and wanted Sean to do that also. Sean advised customer that the stack line will tie into the same pipe Sean was currently in. After the customer was adamant about running it from the stack Sean ran the sand auger from the stack and still couldn’t get it past the same spot he was already having problems at. Before Sean mentioned his suspicion of a possible broken pipe the customer said she believes it may be a broken pipe due to the plastic like material that was found. She believed it was poly from by the tree in front yard under the soil. Sean advised for a second opinion and the customer declined. She also declined for further work to be done. Sean had asked customer to stop running water while he was working but continued to do so. Customer also requested Sean not put the clean out cap back on the stack line. On April 26th Robert [redacted], owner, spoke with [redacted] about the situation. [redacted] was calm at the beginning of the conversation. When Robert explained about what Sean did and that on our paperwork it states we are not responsible for condition of the line, which was signed off on before we began working he became upset. Robert offered to send another technician out, at a discount and [redacted] proceeded to hang up on Robert. [redacted] also state that the work order was never signed and Robert said he would look into it and call him back. Robert tried calling [redacted] twice thereafter to resolve the issue. On Wednesday April 26th Kalin, our senior technician, went out to the property to camera the line to see what was going on. In Kalin’s statement he arrived at 12:05 p.m. Kalin was informed by customer that there was standing water. Kalin informed customer that the line is not draining so we wouldn’t be able to see anything with the camera. She then said the previous tech broke the line. Kalin told her numerous times that we are unable to break the pipe that it already had to be broken. She then raised her voice and kept stating that she was going to sue D.C. Annis Sewer and take us to court. At that point Kalin became uncomfortable and called Robert [redacted], owner. Robert [redacted], owner, was notified by our technician, Kalin on April 26th that he was at [redacted] Minneapolis and didn’t feel safe to remain. The tenant was being verbally abusive, threatening to take us to court and sue us. At which time Robert told the technician to leave. Robert then talked with [redacted] and said normally we would charge a service call for coming out but he would waive the fee. Robert also said he would be willing to discount both the cleaning of the line and the camera work. [redacted] never asked for a refund during any of the conversations with staff or Robert. D.C. Annis Sewer cares about our customers and we are more than willing to work with our customers to come to an agreeable solution. However, due to the unsavory working conditions both technicians experienced we are not able to send another technician out. We do not feel it would be a safe environment for them. Thank you! Tammy [redacted] Offfice Manger D.C.Annis Sewer Inc. Phone: ###-###-####
It is stated in the invoice that the reason for the additional time and charges are due to the amount and size of the rootsThe technician getting caught was not due to lack of experience; he had been cleaning the line for hour before the cable got caught in the lineIt is not true that he only attempted to pull on the cable; she was not there when we was running the machine back and forth over and over to free the cableIt is true that the second technician did determine that they needed to do more, because the cable was buried in tree rootsShe asked me if having technicians was necessary, and it wasFirstly, they needed to operate machines, and the main reason for technicians was safetyIn order to prevent the first technician from being hurt, a second technician was neededI did work with her on the cost and gave a discount of $I was not trying to charge her unnecessarily, and the discount I gave proves thatWhen we did the work years ago, we suggested that she would need it done yearly from then on, and she did not follow through, which contributed to the difficulty of this last visitIf you read the paperwork, you will see that what I am saying is true and what she is reporting is false
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 13, 2016/02/09) */
We have gathered all the information on the case with *** ***We are also sending a copy of the work order from DC ANNIS as well as the copy from Ron the sewer rat
*** called in on Christmas day with a main line back upWe
dispatched technician JohnJohn went to ***s house like we have in the past more than a few times
John worked diligently to get the massive amounts of roots that were in the lineHe was using a Dsize blade (the largest available) to clean the line correctlyThere were issues getting the blades in due to the amount of roots and possible offsetsHe went down in size of blade to try and get throughJohn was still having issues and suspected there was an offset causing more issuesJohn talked to the customer that he would need a camera to inspect or John could keep working but that would go into overtimeThe customer said he would get a camera at a later time and denied having extra time spent to adequately clean the lineThis is why we did not warranty the lineThe customer denied paying for extra time to get the line fully removed of rootsWhen you have older lines and your line gets offsets that leaves adequate space for roots to growWith not having his line cleaned 7/23/that gave the roots a lot of time to growThis is why we recommend to have your line cleaned on a yearly basis when you have an older line with a lot of tree rootsThis particular time they grew in massive amounts that would take longer than the one and a half hour that the $coversWe also did not even charge him the holiday rates as it was on Christmas dayHe was supposed to be charged $
When the customer called back, when the line had backed up again we advised him prior to coming out so there was no surprises that it would be chargeable as there was no warrantyWe did not warranty it because we advised of needing a camera or more time which the customer refusedWhen we advised the customer of this he became angryThe office staff offered to get his information over to the owner so that he can contact the customer and come to an agreement
Bob *** (owner of DC ANNIS) called *** to talk about situation and get more informationBob went over all the details with the customer and tried to explain the reasoning*** became even more upset and hung up on BobBob contacted the customer again and asked if it was fair to charge him half price*** refused and said he wanted all his money back or nothing and he would go to the Revdex.com
Bob requested a copy of the DVD provided from Ron the sewer rat, customer refusedWe had no proof as to what the customer was saying that the line is in good conditionBeing that it has offsets, it means it is not in good condition
We worked on the line for hour and minutes and pulled large amounts of roots outThe customer also notes that Ron the Sewer rat had to run line multiple time as wellMeaning there were massive amounts of roots, which would require additional time to complete which we were refused to do
We performed the $of work for one hour and minsWe should be paid for the work done
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 15, 2016/02/17) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not accept the response submitted on Feb9th, and would like to submit a rebuttalNothing mentioned in the response really affects the bottom line of my complaint, but I feel the need to clarify some of the "facts" mentioned in the responseI've attached a copy of the response with the "facts" I am rebutting numbered
1) The response says John tried several times to get the snake through the sewer, which is correct, but fails to mention that John(the technician)actually did get the 6" cutters all the way through the line on the 2nd tryThat fact is confirmed in John's write up on the work orderI asked him to run it through again to make sure there were no roots left behind and he couldn't do it
2) The response says I did not want John to continue working to remove all the roots from the line because it would go into overtimeThe fact is, John gave me every indication that the roots were all removed and he said the sewer was draining well, which he mentioned in the write upHe never mentioned, at any time, that there would be no warranty
3)The response states that the $lflat rate for the job is supposed to only cover only l-l/hours of workNow where on the work order does it say that, and that fact was never mentioned to me at any time, before, during, or after the work was doneI have no idea where that comes from4) There are several lies that are mentioned by Mr***First, he did not call me, I called him, after *** the *** *** did the work for me and I discovered that there really wasn't any big problem with my sewer, I called him requesting a refundSecond, he became belligerent and hung up on me, I didn't hang up on himThird, I never made any threats to him about contacting the Revdex.com
I only decided to complain to the Revdex.com after he hung up on meFourth, he never offered to return half the price, or anything at all for that matter.It's true that I refused to send him the DVD that was made by *** the *** *** but I did tell him he was free to look at the videoAlso, they did not pull "massive" amounts out of the lineThey have pulled more roots out of the line at other times when they were hereIn fact, *** the *** *** pulled out as much, or more, than John didI was actually somewhat surprised at the small amount that John removed, considering the trouble he seemed to be having
The bottom line is, I paid for the line to be cleaned and it was not cleaned, forcing me to pay someone else to do it, along with paying to have a camera run through ii, which would not have been necessary had it been cleaned properly the first time!
Oh February 09, 2016, the business provided the following information: We have gathered all the information on the case with *** ***We are also sending a copy of the work order from DC ANNIS as well as the copy from Ron the sewer rat
*** called in on Christmas day with a main line back upWe dispatched technician JohnJohn went to *** house like we have in the past more than a few times
John worked diligently to get the massive amounts of roots that were in the lineHe was using a Dsize blade (the largest available) to clean the line correctlyThere were issues getting the blades in due to the amount of roots and possible offsetsHe went down in size of blade to try and get through
John was still having issues and suspected there was an offset causing more issuesJohn talked to the customer that he would need a camera to inspect or John could keep working but that would go into overtimeThe customer said he would get a camera at a later time and denied having extra time spent to adequately clean the lineThis is why we did not warranty the lineThe customer denied paying for extra time to get the line fully removed of rootsWhen you have older lines and your line gets offsets that leaves adequate space for roots to grow
With not having his line cleaned 7/23/that gave the roots a lot of time to growThis is why we recommend to have your line cleaned on a yearly basis when you have an older line with a lot of tree rootsThis particular time they grew in massive amounts that would take longer than the one and a half hour that the $coversWe also did not even charge him the holiday rates as it was on Christmas dayHe was supposed to be charges $
When the customer called back, when the line had backed up again we advised him prior to coming out so there was no surprises that it would be chargeable as there was no warrantyWe did not warranty it because we advised of needing a camera or more time which the customer refusedWhen we advised the customer of this he became angryThe office staff offered to get his information over to the owner so that he can contact the customer and come to an agreement
Bob *** (owner of DC Annis) called *** to talk about situation and get more informationBob went over all the details with the customer and tried to explain the reasoning*** became even more upset and hung up on BobBob contacted the customer again and asked if it was fair to charge him half price*** refused and said he wanted all his money back or nothing and he would go to the Revdex.comBob requested a copy of the DVD provided from *** to *** *** customer refusedWe had no proof as to what the customer was saying that the line is in good conditionBeing that it has offsets, it means it is not in good condition
We worked on the line for hour and minutes and pulled large amounts of roots outThe customer also notes that *** the *** *** had to run line multiple time as wellMeaning there were massive amounts of roots, which would require additional time to complete which we were refused to do
We performed the $of work for on hour and minutes We should be paid for the work done
Final Business Response /* (4000, 17, 2016/02/18) */
We do not wish to go back and forth on the same information we will need to disagree at this pointThe responses that you have made, contradict what you have said in previous complaints with us or with the Revdex.com
We are still willing to settle this and refund you half of the moneyOur tech John did work for over an hour which should not be discredited and he should be paid for
Mr Smith can see there were still roots in the line which John asked for extra time and was deniedAt which point the other company of course was able to remove the rest of the roots in the time allotted for that company
To end this, again as we stated, we are still willing to work with the customerWe will refund 50% of his money
Please let us know if this can be resolved and we will get that back to you as soon as possible
Thank you
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 19, 2016/02/19) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Nothing I said in any response contradicts anything I said previously
I had to pay another company an additional $because D.CAnnis did not do what I hired them to doPartially cleaning the sewer line was of NO VALUE to me, therefore, I am entitled to a full refund
Thank you
I am rejecting this response because: The business did not really offer an acceptable answer for the excess hours and labor involvedIt is clear ro me, for many reasons that the first technician was not very experienced and got his equipment caughtHe did not use any technique to get free other than just pulling as hard as he couldThe second tech spent a minute or so of his time assisting Jesse this way before he realized this was not going to workI asked if it was really necessary for two techs to be present since only one was doing the workThe owner Bob said he would not allow his men to work alone for safety reasons which I find absurd for many reasonsI could have told the workers to leave after clearing their machine or even not allowed them to come into my home the following day but I was assured by owner Bob that he was going to “work with me” on the cost and I decided to give him the benefit of the doubtIn my opinion, Bob abused that trust and decided he was going to take me for whatever he could. Remember, DC Annis did the work only years ago and they did the job in an hour’s timeThis first job was after years or more of no maintenanceTo turn a $job into a $job is quite a trick and it was pretty clear to me that if the more experienced tech had been sent out first, this would have been an hour’s worth of work which is what time was actually spent clearing the weeds
It is stated in the invoice that the reason for the additional time and charges are due to the amount and size of the roots. The technician getting caught was not due to lack of experience; he had been cleaning the line for 1 hour before the cable got caught in the line. It is not true that he only attempted to pull on the cable; she was not there when we was running the machine back and forth over and over to free the cable. It is true that the second technician did determine that they needed to do more, because the cable was buried in tree roots. She asked me if having 2 technicians was necessary, and it was. Firstly, they needed to operate 2 machines, and the main reason for 2 technicians was safety. In order to prevent the first technician from being hurt, a second technician was needed. I did work with her on the cost and gave a discount of $160.00. I was not trying to charge her unnecessarily, and the discount I gave proves that. When we did the work 3 years ago, we suggested that she would need it done yearly from then on, and she did not follow through, which contributed to the difficulty of this last visit. If you read the paperwork, you will see that what I am saying is true and what she is reporting is false.
On Tuesday, April 25th at 1:42 p.m. [redacted] contacted our office to inquire about their shower drain and mainline backup. Jaysha, dispatcher, took all the pertinent information and scheduled the appointment for Wednesday the 25th between 12-5. [redacted] inquired about our pricing for a...
shower drain and was quoted $130 for the first hour, which normally gets the job done. However, there are times the shower drain can turn into needing the main line cleaned so [redacted] was also quoted $180 for the first 1 ½ hours up to 100 feet, which normally gets the job done. On Wednesday, April 25th our technician, Sean, arrived at the property at 3:10 p.m. Upon arrival Sean went over the paperwork and received customer’s signature prior to work being performed. Our paperwork’s verbiage states the following: The customer authorizes work and agrees to terms and conditions. They acknowledge and accept that aged and deteriorated plumbing fixtures, piping and appurtenances may no longer be serviceable and they agree to hold D.C. Annis Sewer blameless for any damage and destruction to those items as a result of cleaning efforts. D.C. Annis Sewer is not responsible for unforeseen or hidden problems and customer accepts risk that any mechanical snake used to attempt to clean or clear a drain pipe may contribute and/or cause leakage anywhere in the drain system. In the event of emergency and/or warranty services, D.C. Annis Sewer shall not be held liable for water damage or any other damage that may result in the interim. Our paperwork also states customer should not authorize and/or sign this work to be attempted if you do not agree with any part of this statement. It also states customer acknowledges that they are an authorized representative of the property and accept all terms as stated and/or intended. After receiving signature Sean began working, at which time a man and woman began arguing about prices. The disagreement continued while Sean was working and became heated, at that time the man was told to get out by the woman. In Sean’s statement he did the following: ran the cable from the floor clean out where there was standing water. He ran a D6 blade and got stuck at around 60 feet. He pulled the cable back and downsized it to a D4 blade. That blade also got stuck at roughly 60 feet. He pulled the cable back and found roots and a plastic like material. He ran the D4 blade again and got drainage for a brief moment. Customer ran water and it clogged back up again. Once again roots and a plastic like material was pulled back. The blades came back polished, which means there is a possible break in the pipe. Sean then downsized again to a sand auger and still couldn’t get past 60 feet. The customer told Sean the last company came out 3 + years ago, ran the smallest blades they had out of fear of breaking the pipe. By running the smallest blades the line was never getting properly cleaned. The customer argued that they always ran it from stack line and wanted Sean to do that also. Sean advised customer that the stack line will tie into the same pipe Sean was currently in. After the customer was adamant about running it from the stack Sean ran the sand auger from the stack and still couldn’t get it past the same spot he was already having problems at. Before Sean mentioned his suspicion of a possible broken pipe the customer said she believes it may be a broken pipe due to the plastic like material that was found. She believed it was poly from by the tree in front yard under the soil. Sean advised for a second opinion and the customer declined. She also declined for further work to be done. Sean had asked customer to stop running water while he was working but continued to do so. Customer also requested Sean not put the clean out cap back on the stack line. On April 26th Robert [redacted], owner, spoke with [redacted] about the situation. [redacted] was calm at the beginning of the conversation. When Robert explained about what Sean did and that on our paperwork it states we are not responsible for condition of the line, which was signed off on before we began working he became upset. Robert offered to send another technician out, at a discount and [redacted] proceeded to hang up on Robert. [redacted] also state that the work order was never signed and Robert said he would look into it and call him back. Robert tried calling [redacted] twice thereafter to resolve the issue. On Wednesday April 26th Kalin, our senior technician, went out to the property to camera the line to see what was going on. In Kalin’s statement he arrived at 12:05 p.m. Kalin was informed by customer that there was standing water. Kalin informed customer that the line is not draining so we wouldn’t be able to see anything with the camera. She then said the previous tech broke the line. Kalin told her numerous times that we are unable to break the pipe that it already had to be broken. She then raised her voice and kept stating that she was going to sue D.C. Annis Sewer and take us to court. At that point Kalin became uncomfortable and called Robert [redacted], owner. Robert [redacted], owner, was notified by our technician, Kalin on April 26th that he was at [redacted] Minneapolis and didn’t feel safe to remain. The tenant was being verbally abusive, threatening to take us to court and sue us. At which time Robert told the technician to leave. Robert then talked with [redacted] and said normally we would charge a service call for coming out but he would waive the fee. Robert also said he would be willing to discount both the cleaning of the line and the camera work. [redacted] never asked for a refund during any of the conversations with staff or Robert. D.C. Annis Sewer cares about our customers and we are more than willing to work with our customers to come to an agreeable solution. However, due to the unsavory working conditions both technicians experienced we are not able to send another technician out. We do not feel it would be a safe environment for them. Thank you! Tammy [redacted] Offfice Manger D.C.Annis Sewer Inc. Phone: ###-###-####