Asheville Homescapes, Inc.

In regards to complaint ID ***: Manufacturer parts warranties only reimburse the technician for the diagnostic after the repair is complete and the claim is submittedIn this case the labor allotment covered only the labor involved in replacing the part itselfIt did not cover any labor for
draining the boiler system and bleeding the radiators, which is necessary for the repairTherefore the customer in this case is liable for the draining and bleeding of the system plus the diagnostic, the actual installation of the part would have been coveredIn addition, the diagnostic would have been reimbursed once the repair was completeThe pricing quoted to the customer was $for the diagnostic service call plus for non-covered laborWe performed the diagnostic, collected the $and then quoted the non-covered laborThe customer then refused the repairs and called another companyAt this point we could not complete the repair thus allowing us to reimburse the $If we had been allowed to complete the repair the customer would have been reimbursedThe customer then asked for the $backWe charge $to have a trained, licensed, and insured technician drive to customers homes and make professional diagnosticsThis is exactly the service the customer paid for and receivedThe customer made the decision to not allowed us to complete the warranty work and is therefore responsible for paying for the service that they received

I've reviewed the claim with our plumber and checked the paperworkThere was a billing mistake on the plumbers part where labor was charged for the installation of the expansion tank and regulator however the labor was already factored into the cost shownThe expansion tank and regulator are
absolutely required to ensure proper operation of the water heater at this customers home due to high water pressureI can't speak to much else in the dispute being as I was not there and neither was the complainantWe are willing to refund the customer $which would be all work (parts and labor) performed that was not directly related to the expansion tank and regulator as the need for these items is indisputableIf there is still any leakage happening we would be more than happy come out and diagnose it free of chargeIf this is an agreeable solution we would send a reimbursement check immediatelyThank you

Mr*** needed his expansion tank and relief valve changed on his boiler systemWe quoted him a price for that repair, he accepted and we performed that repairWe also informed him at the time of that repair that he may need an autofill valve as wellHe now doesThat is additional work unrelated to the first repairHe was quoted a price for that repair ($450) he refused and now wants it for for freeWe can't do thatWhat we are willing to do is perform the necessary repair at a discounted rate $to cover our costsWe stand by our original repair and diagnostics, we are only making this concession to resolve this issue and move on

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. I hope that the business also reviews its internal practices thoroughly as this is the second time that this was brought to their attention. The same issue existed in and and the problem was to have been resolved then, but evidently it was not
Regards,
*** ***

In order to respond to this, I feel I need to break the many erroneous statements into their component parts:Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “Our diagnostic fee is not “just to show up” it is the charge to have a (1) trained, licensed, insured, background-checked, drug-free, (2) professional arrive at your home to (3) properly diagnose the cause of the problem with your boiler.” My rebuttal: I would like to focus on Mitchell’s own words (1) Trained, (2) Professional, and most importantly (3) Properly Diagnose. If the $119 fee I was charged was for the service of a Trained Professional to Properly Diagnose the problem, this service was clearly not performed as the problem was by no reasonable definition, Properly Diagnosed. As the rest of the fee that pertains to Mitchell employees being background-checked or drug-free, I would hope that we would agree that this is the cost of doing business. I do thank them for their diligence. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “The repair was never quoted as an “all day job” none of our repairs are. The price quoted was for the necessary repairs. The customer was free to accept of decline the repairs. He accepted and agreed to pay the predetermined fee for the specific repair. We did exactly what the customer agreed to pay us to do.” My rebuttal: I was without question told that I should allocate all morning to this job and that was because they would need to drain the system to make the repairs. As it relates to the price of the job, I trusted that if payed this amount, the problem would be 100% fixed, which it is without question, not fixed. If part of the total fee is for Mitchell as they state in their own words to “properly diagnose the cause of the problem with your boiler” they did not do this, and compounded the problem with hastily performed repairs, that may have been unnecessary, and did not solve the root cause. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “Although it is irrelevant to the complaint, it should be pointed out that our GPS-tracked vehicles show that we arrived onsite at 9am for a “morning” appointment and did not leave until after 11am, hardly 45 minutes.” My rebuttal: I received a phone call at 9:17 from Ron J indicating that he would be at least 20 minutes away from arrival. He did not arrive until 10:15 -10:30. I am happy to provide my phone records if Mitchell is willing to provide their GPS tracking statements. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “The customer states that he called with “questions.” The call we received was not so much questions as it was threats that he would spread bad reviews to as many people as he could including Angie’s List, the Revdex.com, etc. unless we agreed to refund him the majority of the money that he had agreed to pay for the work we completed as agreed upon.” My rebuttal: This is not factually accurate; the phone call certainly began with questions. However, when it became clear that Mitchell was less than up-front on their initial assessment of the work effort required, I did state that consumers have rights and means to take action against providers who are less than honest with their estimates. Furthermore, only a provider who would not stand by their work would take these actions to be “threats,” as Mitchell states. It was also on this call that the representative from Mitchell said, the work took less time than they estimated and, had they run into problems, they would have corrected them and absorbed that time at no cost. I would debate that in the brief time Mitchell was at my home, the boiler could not possibly been professionally tested to ensure that it was fixed. Let us assume that Mitchell arrived at my home at 9:45AM (which I dispute). They, then would have (1) drained they system, (2) made all the stated repairs, (3) filled the system, (4) bleed all the radiators, (6) tested the system to the point where the pressure would fail if improperly fixed (at least 45 minutes for the boiler to build pressure and get hot). All 6 of these steps would have been done in a disputed timeframe of 45 Minutes to 1.5 Hours. Their story does not hold water. Also, please note that I did not take a single action with the Revdex.com or Angie’s List until after 11/7 when the boiler totally failed upon first use. I owned up to the responsibility that while Mitchell Plumbing and Heating was unfair, and did not properly scope the work, nor provide a corresponding fair estimate. I, as the consumer did pay them and should have been more diligent in my selection of providers. From my experience with Mitchell, that lesson is very well learned. However, once the workmanship 100% failed (upon fist use) due to an initial misdiagnosis of the problem by Mitchell, I did take action with the Revdex.com and [redacted] only following a second request for Mitchell to stand by their professionals, their diagnosis, and the workmanship on 11/7. It was Mitchell who refused this opportunity, and I was told that it would cost an additional $400-$600 for them to take any action at all. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “It was explained to him that we completed the work as agreed and for the price that a () agreed and there is no further action necessary on our part.My rebuttal: So, Mitchell can (1) misdiagnose a problem, (2) misrepresent the time and cost to fix the misdiagnosed problem, and (3) when their workmanship fails, they have no accountability for their work? What statement of integrity are they making here? Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “He then demanded to speak with () owner along with referring to him in derogatory terms. At this point the customer had spoken to () highest level of management required for his specific case especially considering his tone”My rebuttal: I did demand to speak with the owner. His name is on the business and should have some accountability to his customers. I was told he would not have a conversation with me. I did state that this type of customer service and general treatment of a former customer was un-American. What kind of society would we have if everyone did not stand by their work, the way Mitchell is? Who would you trust? We are built on a foundation of hard work, quality, and trust. If the highest level of management I can speak to given my case is only the person who answers the phone, what does Mitchell expect my tone to be? When people are so visibly and undisputedly wronged, they are angry and deserve to be angry. This is not right, not fair, and does not hold with the foundational values we as Americans believe in. I stand by my words. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “As far as the symptom reoccurring, during the initial repair we did notify the customer of another potential and unrelated problem that may present the same symptom in the future and that if it does then it would need to be addressed.”My rebuttal: I disagree with this entire statement and go on record as stating that it is untrue. I was not home during the initial repair, how could this have occurred? Should we add this as a step (7) to the many things Mitchell miraculously did in the 45 Minutes to 1.5 hours they were in my home? I simply was not present. If they are speaking about the initial diagnosis, why would they not include this in their professional diagnosis that I paid $119 for? Why try to break this into 2 repairs when it fairly and rightly, with integrity should have been done in one? Please help me understand? Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “However, in the mean time the customer had already made it perfectly clear that he did not want to work with us anymore. We are sorry that this customer is not happy, however, companies have rights too and we are not required to bend to amounts being extorted for money in exchange for prevention of erroneous public reviewsMy rebuttal: Upon the 100% failure of their proper diagnosis and work on 11/7, I approached Mitchell with the opportunity to stand by their work and fix the problem. They refused and told me in clear language that they would not fix the problem for any less than an additional $400-$600. If they were actually sorry, they would try to fix this, right? I comprehensively reject the charge that this is in anyway extortion, and all consumers and consumer advocate groups should be insulted by the mere proposition by Mitchell that it is. The only vehicles consumers have are these consumer advocate institutions and their reviews, to protect each other. I can state that all but 2 reviews I have ever written have been A+ rated for providers that far exceed customer expectations. Every provider I have written a review for, I have also recommended to friends and they have been thankful for the business and recommendation. One of the only exceptions is for Mitchell who stands far below any expectation from an honest fairminded customer. Mitchell Plumbing and Heating States: “The customer dictated through his actions how his case was going to be handled. We as a company always want to make sure that our customers are happy with our services and we work hard every day to improve the customer experience. We hope that customer () who want reliable, quality service at a fair pricing turn to usMy rebuttal: The only action I took which dictated this case was trusting Mitchell Plumbing and Heating to be honest, up-front, and fair enough to stand by their work. I first and foremost asked them to fix the problem and was willing to pay for their services. The result was clear: (1) a misrepresented level of effort related to their estimate, (2) a misdiagnosed problem, (3) hastily performed work that was not tested for quality upon completion, (4) lack of accountability for their craftsmanship. This is clear and hard to contradict for an honest service provider. Mitchell needs to decide with their next action if they are worthy of being considered such. It is up to them. All that I am asking of Mitchell Plumbing and Heating is that they fix my boiler at no additional cost, or refund me the cost on the misdiagnosed and hastily performed work. Upon completion of either of the items requested, I would consider this complaint closed.

I have looked into the details of this claim and found that the customer, in this case, is correct. I have authorized a full refund and the  payment is being mailed today, May 3. Unfortunately there was a critical data entry error that occurred and resulted in the customer being removed from...

our call list. This is an isolated incident and we extend our sincerest apologies to the customer, and as mentioned, have issued a refund in the exact amount he has requested. ($555.90)  Again, we apologize, and are taking steps  to ensure that this type error will not happen in the future.

We are sorry that this customer feels as though he was treated unfairly but the vast majority of this review is either entirely false or exaggerated. Our diagnostic fee is not "just to show up" it is the charge  to have trained, licensed, insured, background-checked, drug-free, professional...

arrive at your home and properly diagnose the cause of the problem with your boiler.  The repair was never quoted as an "all day job" none of our repairs are. The price quoted was for the necessary repairs. The customer was free to accept or decline the repairs. He accepted and as such agreed to pay a predetermined fee for a specific repair. We did exactly what the customer agreed to pay us to do. Although it irrelevant to this complaint, it should be pointed out that our GPS-tracked vehicles show that we arrived onsite at 9 am for a "morning" appointment and did not leave until after 11 am, hardly 45 minutes. The customer also stated that he called with "questions". The call we received was not so much questions as it was threats that he would spread bad reviews to as many people as he could including [redacted] list, the Revdex.com, etc. unless we agreed to refund him the majority of the money that he had agreed to pay for the work that we completed as agreed upon. It was explained to him that we completed the work as agreed and for the price that agreed and there is no further action necessary on our part. He then demanded to speak with owner along with referring to him in derogatory terms. At this point the customer had spoken to highest level of management required for his specific case especially when considering his tone. As far the symptom reoccurring, during the initial repair we did notify the customer of another potential and unrelated problem that may present the same symptom in the future and that if it does then it would need addressed. However, in the mean time the customer had already made it perfectly clear that he did not want to work with us any more. We are sorry that this customer is not happy, however, companies have rights too and we are not required to bend to amounts to being extorted for money in exchange for  prevention of erroneous public reviews. This customer dictated through his actions how his case was going to be handled. We as a company always want to make sure that our customers are happy with our services and we work hard everyday to improve the customer experience. We hope that customer who want reliable, quality service at fair pricing turn to us.

From* [redacted]>Date: Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 12:04 PMSubject: rebuttal for complaint ID [redacted]To: "[redacted]Cc: "[redacted]Dear Sir: In regards to Mitchell’s Plumbing response to complaint ID [redacted]: Mitchell’s Plumbing, who originally installed the gas boiler, performed the diagnostic repair. Afterwards they called us and informed us that only the part would be covered under the manufacturer’s warranty and that in addition to the $119.00 diagnostic repair we would have to pay $695.00 for labor charges. This amount seemed extremely high since the boiler was under 5 years old.  Mitchell’s Plumbing registered our boiler with the manufacturer and a third party extended warranty company at the time of installation for 5 years  total coverage.  Unfortunately Mitchell’s Plumbing made no mention of the 5 year warranty when quoting us their repair estimate.  In fact Mitchell’s Plumbing had no idea that we had the 5 year warranty coverage.  Again Mitchell’s plumbing actually registered our gas boiler at the time of installation with a third party company called [redacted]’s Insurance.  This was a selling feature that we appreciated at the time of sale.At this point we no longer trusted Mitchell’s Plumbing and called a local competitor. We called [redacted] Plumbing who took some information over the phone to research what warranty coverage we may have. [redacted] Plumbing promptly called us back and informed us that yes we did have coverage up to 5 years from the date of installation.We called Mitchell’s Plumbing back and they had no idea about the additional 5 year coverage and said they would have to look into it. After several phone calls with Mitchell Plumbing, spanning over two weeks, they finally agreed that a portion of the labor would be covered. The total cost to us after Mitchell’s reimbursement from the warranty company would be $119.00 plus $303.50. A grand total of $422.50.At this point we no longer trusted the competency of the management at Mitchell’s Plumbing and called [redacted] Plumbing to have them inspect our gas boiler problem and give us an estimate for the repair. [redacted] Plumbing inspected our gas boiler at “no cost” and said since Mitchell’s Plumbing put in several shut off valves that it would not be necessary to drain and bleed the entire system. [redacted]’s estimate for the entire repair including the diagnostic call was $185.00.Because Mitchell’s Plumbing was unaware of the warranty on our gas boiler that they themselves installed and registered for the total of 5 years coverage and because they misdiagnosed the actual total repairs needed to complete the job we prudently requested that a competitor give us their estimate for the exact same repair. Since we no longer trusted Mitchell’s Plumbing management and diagnostic estimate we agreed to pay [redacted] Plumbing to do the repair on our gas boiler. We paid [redacted] their diagnostic charge and labor and therefore we are requesting Mitchell’s Plumbing to reimburse us for their diagnostic charge of $119.00. Sincerely,[redacted]   Cleve Heller | Accountant 2Department of Corrections | Pennsylvania Correctional Industries/SCI Fayette50 Overlook Drive | LaBelle, PA 15450Phone: 724.364.2200 x1180 | Fax: 724.364.1013www.cor.pa.gov