Audio Enhancement Design Security, Inc

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 12, 2015/06/26) */
[redacted] only paid $694.59 on 7/9/14 for speaker repair and security monitoring. AED is not responsible for disconnection of phone line to security system as per the contract they signed. There is a trouble light on the keypad that lights up when...

there is a condition of the system. They should have called us for service.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 14, 2015/06/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
[redacted]'s response is factually inaccurate, and so unclear it's difficult to respond.
There was never a "phone line" in our home. [redacted] installed a secure CELLULAR connection since we don't have a land line. (The sole purpose of a cellular connection is to connect to the security system. It is not a cell phone system. It does not depend on having a functioning land line.) I have no idea what he could mean by saying there was a "disconnection of phone line to security system". I'm guessing HE chose to disconnect the cellular connection he installed and didn't tell us we no longer had service.
I ask the Revdex.com to determine clearly whether there is a problem with the cellular system he installed, or whether he deliberately disconnected our security system without informing us and after he had told us it was working. If he chose to terminate our service I request the Revdex.com to determine the date of disconnection. In either case, how is it OUR responsibility to guess that there was a problem? He stated that it was HIS job to monitor for problems and call US.
Since [redacted] never provided us with a copy of the contract or an instruction manual we don't know what the contract says, or how to operate the security system. If the "trouble light" shows a problem it's his job to contact us. It's not our job to know what "trouble light" means.
We reluctantly asked [redacted] to reactivate the security system since he had installed the original system. He had originally installed a brand of technology that almost no one services so it was either work with [redacted], despite the many problems, or pay to have an entirely new system installed. Despite knowing the system, [redacted]'s original bill tripled. He installed expensive equipment without giving us a written bid. He finally threw a new bill on our kitchen table after we had just talked to him in person for 45 minutes and left the house. Instead of taking the opportunity to speak to us face-to-face about the higher costs, he just left the bill without explanation and walked out.
He raises the issue of speaker repair: the other part of his business is stereo installation. Since he had installed the original equipment in our home we asked him to repaint the in-wall speaker grills to match the new wall paint. He painted OVER THE HOLES in the grills making it impossible for sound to come out. His work was incompetent and expensive. The renovation contractor agreed that the work was completely unacceptable. Working with the contractor, Tom [redacted], we had to pay another contractor $500 to fix the damage caused by [redacted]. For the portion of the $694.59 bill that went to speaker grills we received nothing of value.
At this point we'd had it with dealing with [redacted] and spoke to Tom [redacted], the home renovation contractor who brought [redacted] into our home in the first place. Tom apologized and said that he had had many problems with [redacted] over the years and wouldn't be working with him any more.
It was TOM who told us not to deal with [redacted] directly any more. He apologized and took the bill that [redacted] had thrown on our kitchen counter. Tom said he would "deal with it". We clearly understood that Tom would work out the final details with [redacted] as part of a $50,000 renovation.
I have no idea what happened between [redacted] and Tom [redacted]. What I was told was that our security system was reactivated ([redacted]), and that the bill was taken care of ([redacted]).
We discovered that the home security system wasn't working when we had a break in recently.
"They should have called us for service." How would we know to call when [redacted] told us that the system was working and that we could count on him to be in touch if there was a problem?
If there was a problem why didn't [redacted] send us a second bill? Why didn't he try to resolve the problem, either with us or with Tom [redacted]? He simply took our money, shut off the service (we're guessing; his response is unclear), and made NO attempt to resolve the problem.
The Revdex.com made four attempts to contact [redacted] beginning May 13. We finally received a fifty-six word response that is factually inaccurate and so unclear it's impossible to determine whether he chose to shut off service, or there was a problem with the cellular (phone) module that he installed. The Revdex.com itself has seen what it's like trying to deal with [redacted].
[redacted] is a SECURITY contractor. He represents himself as taking personal care of your family's safety and security. He has the security code to enter your home.
Since we received nothing of value for $694.59 we should be refunded that amount.
I've been reluctant to involve Tom [redacted] in this matter since we've had good relations with him. In fact, he told us that we were "extremely easy" to work with.
We went to the Revdex.com for mediation because we were told by Tom not to deal directly with [redacted].
We ask the Revdex.com to obtain prompt, clear answers to these questions:
Did he shut off the security system he installed, or did the equipment he installed fail, thus producing the "trouble light"?
Did he make any attempt to resolve this issue, either by contacting us, or with Tom [redacted]? How did Tom [redacted] "take care of this"? Why did he walk out of the house instead of talking to his customers face-to-face?
Since we received nothing of value for the speakers, and the service was discontinued we should receive a refund of $694.59.
If we do not receive a clear answer without waiting another six weeks we will pursue EVERY avenue possible to resolve this issue.
[redacted]