Avis Plumbing Heating & Air Conditioning Inc

TIn response to the 4/consumer response attributed to *** ***, Avis Heating & Air Conditioning is still happily willing to replace the three broken boards previously mentioned, as well as remove any trash left behind in the attic The referred to response prepared by/for Mr*** is hard to fit into the context of the work performed or agreement between the parties since Mr*** was not present for any of what is being discussed. All conversations, agreements, recommendations, and money exchanged was between the homeowner and Avis Heating & Air Conditioning. Mr*** is an outside party, and without access to the homeowner, a situation like this is difficult to resolve Rather than Avis getting into a lengthy exchange with Mr*** regarding the principles of airflow, cfm, fpm velocity, static pressure, air drag coefficient, duct design, and the reasons that galvanized sheet metal duct hasn't been installed in attics for the past few decades..we would prefer to add to our offer to come out and re-inspect our duct system. We are quite confident that the proper cfm is being achieved, but we would be more than happy to bring one of our regularly calibrated air-flow hoods to the home to verify at each supply register Avis would like to make the homeowner, a longtime client, happy...and with the replacement of the three broken boards, removal of attic trash, and a re-inspection of our duct system, we would be correcting any missteps that might have happened during our installation. During that visit, we can take a look at the gable mounted attic fanbut it should be known that gable fans don't have ducts attached to them. They exhaust hot attic air out to the atmosphere, and are typically thermostatically controlled. We can take a look at that for the homeowner while we are there for the other items. Thank youAvis Heating & Air Conditioning

We were alarmed that one of our staff was harassing Ms*** with phone callsI have verfied that her name is on the internal Do Not Call ListThis employee was not checking his list which is in violation of company policyHe has received a disciplinary action with a letter in his fileAll
other employees have been reminded of the importance of the Do Not Call list as wellI would like to sincerely apologize to Ms***, but I hesitate to call her as she does not want to hear from us againI am hoping that she will read our complaint response and see that we have taken action against this employee as this is not how we wish to be represented to the public

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will consider this complaint resolved. Thank you for your quick response.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.In response to Avis Heating and Air Conditioning’s response on 4/27, we have the following comments: 1.     I have been authorized by my mom to represent her interests.2.     The proposed remedy by Avis is not acceptable. 3.     The situation can easily be resolved if Avis agrees to take care of the following 7 items: a.     Replace the broken rafter ties. b.     Remove the trash and original metal ducts they had removed. c.      Reinstall the ducts to meet industry standards. d.     Repair the cracks in the walls and ceiling caused by the removal of the rafter ties. e.     Repaint the rooms affected by the repairs. f.      Replace the ductwork connected to the Bathroom exhaust fan which appears to have been removed by Avis during demolition. (Note:  The duct has nothing to do with the gable-mounted exhaust fan.) g.     Provide a written explanation of why the original metal ducts were replaced in the first place.   Evidence in the attic makes it clear the Avis technician removed the rafter ties.  The Structural Engineer’s report suggests the cracks were caused by the removal of the ties.  There is no sign of patching as Avis has suggested.    If Avis is indeed interested in making the homeowner happy as they suggest, they will take responsibility for their technician’s mistakes instead of expecting my mom to pay for the damages he caused.   Sincerely,   [redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

In response to Mr[redacted]'s complaint about work done at the
home of his mother, [redacted] in [redacted] by Avis, we have fully
investigated the issues with all parties and offer the following time line and
attempts at resolution
We did install new HVAC duct work in the
attic of the home
We received a call on 3/3/from [redacted], our customer's son saying that we
didn't remove some of the old ductwork in the atticHe also complained about
rat feces in the attic and the fact that he believed our technician had committed
to cleaning up the fecesWe had the original technician revisit the property on 3/8/and he was now told
that it was the installer who said he would clean the feces and repair three
x boards in the atticAs that installer is no longer with our company, we
cannot ask him if he made this commitment
IF he did, he did not mention anything about it to his dispatcherThe
technician took multiple pictures of the attic area and provided them to management
The technician met with the owner of our company and he
approved a "good faith" move to replace the three boards as a courtesy and
remove any left-over trash in the attic as we could not confirm what, if any, promises had been made to the
homeowner by the installer a year earlier
Repair and clean up was scheduled for 3/with [redacted]
On 3/21, [redacted] called us and cancelled the repairsHe began accusing us of
causing cracks all throughout the home, in ceilings and wallsWe immediately
set up for our field supervisor, [redacted], to go to the house the next day (3/22) to
investigate the complaint of the cracks.
He arrived at 10:17am per GPS records[redacted]'s visit provided us with ten
photos of cracks, in various areas, most with attempts to have fixed them long
agoHis best estimate is that there are about twenty cracks in this home, in
various locationsThey had been taped, mudded and had texture coat applied
over themThese repairs had given way with continued shifting of the home
[redacted] said he had had a structural engineer out who said that it was "all of the
roof ties that AVIS broke" that caused all of the rooms to start cracking[redacted]
asked for a copy of the report from the engineer
The engineers report was dated for that exact same day and
generated from a firm in [redacted]. It
said that seven boards were broken and that the "dislocation of the ties" due
to duct work installation could have caused the cracking to begin[redacted] called
him and asked him to clarify how he knew the extensive damage had been caused
by Avis and he said that he was "going by the homeowner's opinionHe can't be
certain that it wasn't an earthquake or the house settling that began the
cracking processThe homeowner told him that we broke the ties"In truth, it
was the son of the homeowner who does not live there and was not present when
AVIS did the installationIn addition there is clear evidence that others have
been in this atticThere are sound speakers that have been added and the
wiring goes through this exact area in the attic
AVIS maintains we did not go through this attic dislocating
all of the tiesWe have been in business for forty-three years next month with
an A+ Revdex.com ratingWe have experienced technicians and installers on staff and
we never have had a damage complaint like thisAs a courtesy and our
commitment to customer service, we offered to replace the three boards our
technician noted broken on his investigative visit, but in no way was it an
admission of any guiltMrs[redacted] has been a long time customer and we were
only offering to assist her as we could not verify any commitment made by the
installer who no longer works hereWe are adamant that our goodwill gesture
was just that, a goodwill gesture and not an admission to having done anything
that would have caused damage to our customer's home
We have not been able to speak with the actual homeowner
during this process so we do not know what she desires as resolution[redacted] has
said that he does not want us to clean up the attic nor replace the boards
until all of the cracks are fixed. As
that is not something that is our responsibility, we are at a stalemate

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  Please note the following:Though Avis representatives have suggested they had "fully investigated" the issue with all parties, they do not appear to have talked to the installer who did the work as he no longer works for the company.  Their response fails to note that their in-house inspector, [redacted] never went into the attic to perform the inspection when the ductwork was installed nor do they mention that the ductwork installation was not executed per industry standards.  Installation issues include:1.  Some ducts are of excessive length.2.  Bend radii do not conform to minimum 1 duct diameter bend radius.3.  Ducts are crimped against joists and rafter ties reducing air flow.4.  Ducts straps are greater than 4' apart and sag exceeds more than 1/2" per foot. Avis installed a new "3-ton Lennox heating system" in the residence in November of 2013.  Scope of work included "Rebuild(ing) Plenum" per the work order, for the sum of $4,150.  In February of 2015,  Avis representative, [redacted] recommended replacement of the ducts in the attic:  "Found original metal ductwork with fiberglass insulation, no asbestos, the plenum around 90's and start collars are falling apart, recommends replace ducts, 5 R-6 duct runs."  The work order goes on to say,"5 R-6 duct runs, reseal plenum around 90's and start collars, and clean rat feces from top of plenum."It is curious there was no recommendation to replace the ducts when the heating system was installed 16 months earlier.  Why would the plenum needed to be resealed so soon after it was installed? Avis's response about the feces is puzzling since cleaning up the rat feces was listed on the 2/23/15 work order by [redacted]. Avis notes in their response: "the original technician revisit(ed) the property on 3/8/16 and he was now told that it was the installer who said he would clean the feces and repair three 1x6 boards in the attic."  It is true the ductwork installer said he would clean up the rat feces and he actually asked for a shop vac to do this work, but he never mentioned the broken rafter ties to anyone as far as we know.  On 3/8/16, [redacted] suggested that the 1x6 boards were not structural and the installer most likely broke them because they were in his way.  [redacted] is now denying he said this.  We were unaware of the broken rafter ties until March 1st when my brother [redacted] went up into the attic to see if he could figure out what was causing the cracks in the walls and ceiling on the west side of the house.  That's when he discovered the broken rafter ties.   No one had been up in the attic since the ducts had been installed.  Since the broken rafter ties were only discovered in March of 2016, Avis's suggestion that [redacted] told [redacted] the installer said he would fix them is not accurate.  It was [redacted] who suggested he would repair the 1x6 ties.We contend that Avis agreed to replace the rafter ties because [redacted]. felt the original installer had most likely broken the ties.  [redacted]. acknowledged that the ductwork installation was substandard and would need to be fixed.  He also suggested the original metal ductwork should have been removed as part of the original scope of work.  Since Avis's in-house inspector, Mr. [redacted] never actually went up into the attic to verify the work had been done correctly, we don't believe Avis management was aware of the substandard installation, the trash, or the broken boards until [redacted] informed them after being in the attic on 3/8/16. The field supervisor, [redacted], who we understand is the company in-house inspector,  did go to the house on or around 3/22/16, but once again did not go up into the attic.  We agree there are an abundance of cracks, but the cracks are new.  Based upon the engineer's report, it is our understanding that the broken rafter ties allowed the roof to settle and that is why the cracks began occurring since the date of the ductwork installation.  My mom and stepdad have lived in the house for 20 years and have never had any drywall work done.   The tape and texturing around the cracks  appears to be the original tape from when the house was built.  I can attest that the cracks are recent and there have been no repairs attempted in the entire time my folks have lived at the house.When I told my brother [redacted] that [redacted] had said the ties weren't structural, he suggested we have an engineer look at it. The engineer confirmed the rafter ties were structural, and were required by code because the ceiling joists in the house run perpendicular to the rafters.  The report did not say seven boards were broken as Avis states, but noted: "There were seven rafter ties that were either broken or severely dislocated from their horizontal position."  Some of the rafter ties had been forced from their original horizontal position down to the top of the ceiling joists.  We are unaware of any photos taken of the attic before Avis installed the ducts, but we do know the cracks appeared since February of 2015.  We concur with [redacted]'s assertion that the installer "probably" moved the rafter ties out of his way.  Evidence in the attic seems to support this:1.  Cracks have appeared since February of 2015.2.  It appears the rafter ties (which are installed at 48" on center) were forced down to make it easier for the installer to move around in the attic.3.  The rafter tie adjacent to the plenum, which one would assume was horizontal when the original ducts were installed, has been forced beneath the ducts exiting the plenum.4.  The broken 1x6 rafter ties are laying across the ceiling joists in the attic, relatively close to where they were once attached.  The splintered edges point to a downward force as cause of the breakage.5.  It appears the ties were broken AFTER the metal ductwork was disconnected and flattened.  Sections of the flattened duct lie underneath the broken shards of the fallen 1x6 ties.And finally,6.  Most of the attic floor is covered with debris from when the roof was replaced a few years ago.  However, there is no debris on top of the broken ties.  Also, the splintered edges where the cracks occurred expose fresh wood, the sign of a recent break.  It is clear the ties were broken since the roof was replaced and the only people that have been up in attic were the men from Avis.  There is indeed speaker wire in the attic but it was installed when my mom and her husband moved into the house 20 years ago, long before the ducts were installed.Though Avis may have an A+ rating and experienced technicians as they claim, the installer on this project was clearly incompetent and [redacted] has admitted such.  Photos show the installation does not meet industry standards as noted above.  The installer failed to remove the original metal ductwork from the attic and appears to have removed the metal ductwork for an exhaust fan without replacing it. (The fan now exhausts air directly into the attic.)  And to top it off, it appears Avis's in-house inspector signed off on the installation without even going into the attic.The evidence clearly shows it was Avis that broke the rafter ties and the Engineer's report states the broken rafter ties led to the cracking:"The crack emerging in the ceiling and walls were likely due to the broken or dislocated ties due to the ductwork installation."Since Avis appears to have broken the ties, we feel the company should be responsible for remedying the situation per the Engineer's recommendations listed in his report.We also think the company should be required to perform an in-house review to determine exactly what led them to replace the original metal ductwork with inferior flexible ductwork.  The metal ductwork appears to be in good condition, (except it's now flat as a pancake), and we cannot understand why [redacted] would have recommended replacing the metal ducts when resealing the plenum (that they had installed 16 months earlier) and fixing the start collars would have been a lot more cost-effective approach.In the event Avis cannot provide a good reason why their salesman recommended replacement of the metal ductwork, we propose the poorly installed fiberglass ductwork be replaced with a new metal ductwork system of equal or better quality than the original metal ductwork that was original to the house, and the $2,000 charged for the ductwork be refunded. We also feel Avis should be responsible for replacing the exhaust fan ductwork that seems to have been inadvertantly removed by the company's installer during demolition.Regards,[redacted]