Beldon Austin

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: I'm not sure where the business got their information regarding work being done on my roofThere was no work on my rooface prior you or after the gutter installationI have yearly inspection and maintenance performed to check for any flashing problems or cracked tilesNothing more since my roof, according to my Roofing contactor , is in good conditionI also take offense to the statement on proper weatherstripping on my doors where water leaked inSince the General Manager never bothered to come and see what was going on, the company cannot make claims of improper maintenance on my partThe water was streaming BEHIND the gutter, as I mentioned in my complaint - streaming down the doors creating a waterfall effect during heavy rainsI am also surprised that now the company is claiming they made no mention of clearing debris from my roof behind the barrier they installed to prevent rain water from creating the waterfall effect in front of my windowsThe barrier was their solution and I voiced my concerns on the debris that would fall behind the barrier as it surely willI believe I am working with the company for an amicable solutionI am not requesting full cost for damaged floor replacementI am only requesting labor costs Regards, [redacted]

The Customer is inaccurate with many of the details in his complaint First, the Customer is inaccurate when he states that the purchase and installation of a LeafGuard gutter system was always to be a finance job Prior to the contract being signed, the Customer did attempt to get financing from Wells Fargo for the installation of a LeafGuard gutter system Yet, Wells Fargo declined his application After Wells Fargo decline to provide a loan to the Customer, the Customer decided to proceed anyway with the contract by paying the down payment with a credit card, with the final payment ultimately to be paid by credit card Specifically, the Customer’s wife signed a document indicating that LeafGuard Central Texas, Inc(“LeafGuard”) had the authority to use the same credit card that was used to pay the down payment for the payment of the balance due However, when LeafGuard tried to run the credit card, it was declined When LeafGuard’s [redacted] asked the Customer’s wife about payment after the credit card was declined, she stated that she did not know why her husband bought the LeafGuard gutter system because they did not have the money for it Nevertheless, LeafGuard substantially complied with its contract obligations (see below); so, LeafGuard worked with the Customer and his wife for them to comply with their contractual obligations Subsequent to the decline of the credit card, the Customer arranged with another finance company, Enerbank, to finance the balance due After a delay caused by the Customer, the Customer signed off on Enerbank’s completion form, indicating that LeafGuard complied with its contractual obligations Despite the delay caused by the Customer, Enerbankwould have financed the loan to the Customer except that the Customer’s wife cancelled the loan the day after the Customer submitted the completion form She indicated to Enerbank that the contractor, LeafGuard, was going to remove the LeafGuard gutter system so there was nothing for them to pay for But, LeafGuard never told either the Customer or his wife that we were going to remove the LeafGuard gutter system In his complaint, the Customer implies that LeafGuard waited until he was on trip so it did not have to fully comply with its contractual obligationsLeafGuard can only control its schedule and not a Customer’sschedule If the Customer cannot be available and feels he/she needs to be available for the installation, LeafGuard will change its schedule to accommodate the Customer’s schedule LeafGuard’s preference is for a customer to be available This Customer did not request that LeafGuard postpone the installation of the LeafGuard gutter system because he was going to be on trip We would have tried to accommodate him if he had.The Customer contends that LeafGuard did not complete its contractual obligations By the Customer’s own actions, this is another inaccuracy within the Customer’s complaintThere was one aspect of the contract that LeafGuard could not do—installing Drainguards because they did not fit the space provided But, LeafGuard never had a contractual obligation to make the space compatible for the Drainguards purchased The Customer, who is a carpenter, stated to just leave the Drainguards, because he would modify the space so the Drainguards would fit So, the Customer did get what he actually requested in the contract—the Drainguards Moreover, as noted above, he signed the completion paperwork for Enerback, signifying that LeafGuard completed its contractual obligations The Customer indicates in his complaint that his wife was not aware of how the contract was to be paid Again, this is inaccurate The Customer’s wife signed the contract, which indicates that the down payment was made by credit card The Customer’s wife was available for the sales presentation, at which time the original financing request to Wells Fargo was declined And, again the Customer’s wife signed the form authorizing LeafGuard to use the credit card The documentation contradicts the Customer’s complaint regarding his wife’s lack of knowledge regarding payment The Customer’s complaint seems to be a situation of buyer’s remorse As the wife has told LeafGuard, she did not believe that they had the money to pay for the LeafGuard gutter system It was not until after LeafGuard sought payment of the balance due—and after the Customer's wife cancelled the loan with Enerbank—that the Customer and/or his wife requested that LeafGuard to take down the LeafGuard gutter system But, LeafGuard already complied with its contractual obligations So, the Customer and his wife should have to also LeafGuard should and does expect full payment of the balance due Accordingly, LeafGuard did send a letter to the Customer and his wife to make full payment or we would turn the matter over to collections It was only after the letter was received by the Customer and his wife when the Customer made this complaint to the Revdex.com Clearly, the Customer is hoping to put pressure on LeafGuard to back off on the collections action Nevertheless, LeafGuard will continued to seek payment Again, the Customer and his wife are legally required to comply with their contractual obligations, as LeafGuard did

RevDex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Although I have yet to receive reimbursement for the damaged flooring, I have been assured that once they receive my signed Full and Final Release, I will be issued a check. The signed document was submitted via email today (Jan 17, 2016). Regards, [redacted]

Having reviewed the Customers complaint along with LeafGuard of Central Texas, Inc.’s
(“LeafGuard”) file regarding this matter, LeafGuard has a different perspective of the situation. While there may have been some communications issues, LeafGuard’s General Manager did attempt to communicate with the Customer upon the General’s Manager returned from her vacation. Further, communication with the Customer was complicated by the Customer being out of country for a period of time. In the Customer’s absence, the Customer’s sister was handling the Customer’s matter for the Customer. Accordingly, the General Manager was communicating with the sister For the reasons indicated below, LeafGuard does not believe that it is responsible for any damage that might have occurred to the Customer’s wood flooring. Nevertheless, in the interest of customer service, LeafGuard is trying to reach an amicable resolution with the CustomerThe Customer might be confused about the guarantee she received, the no-clog guarantee, when she purchased the LeafGuard gutter system in 2010. As the contract language states, the guarantee is not that the gutters would never be clogged; it is that the water in the gutter system will remain free flowing. If the water does not, LeafGuard will clean the gutters at no cost to the Customer. The guarantee does not indicate that LeafGuard would clean debris from the roof or to make periodic (annual) cleanings. In this case, the recent issue involved debris in the gutter system that was blocking water from running down the downspout. So, during a heavy rain, the water would come out of the gutter system because it had no other place to go. The problem was not related to the pitch of the Customer’s roof. LeafGuard’s files do not reflect that at any time was the Customer advised that the pitch of her roof was a source of her water issues. The only reference to the Customer’s roof was that roofers were working on her roof when she made the service request in LeafGuard is unsure how water that might have overflowed the gutter system got to the interior of the Customer’s home. In her complaint, the Customer indicated that the water was “leaking from under the doorway[.]” How did the rain get underneath the weather stripping? If the door had proper weather stripping, water could not have gotten into the home in either or recentlyLeafGuard does not believe that it has a legal obligation regarding the damage to the hardwood floors. Yet, LeafGuard does many things in the interest of Customer Service, even when it does not have a legal obligation to do so. So, LeafGuard is reaching out to the Customer to see if an amiable resolution can be reached

This complaint is assigned to the incorrect company *** Roofing Company did not sell nor install the LeafGuard system on this Customer's home The proper company is LeafGuard of Central Texas

LeafGuard of Central Texas, Inc(“LeafGuard”) apologizes for any part it might have played in causing the Customer to be confused with what the LeafGuard gutter system can or cannot do. Yet, the Customer was confused as what is causing the water to stain his brick column. The issue is
related to his roof, or more specifically, the roof flashing versus any problem with the LeafGuard gutter system. Due to the flashing problem, the water is diverted to the brick column before it even reaches the gutter system. When we spoke with the Customer, he acknowledged that he knows it is a roofing issue Until the Customer gets the flashing issue corrected, he will continue to have the same problem. LeafGuard has offered to take down the gutter system so the Customer could have the roof fixed. Upon the roof being fixed, LeafGuard would reinstall the gutter system. LeafGuard offered to do this at no cost to the Customer, but he declined our offer. Accordingly, there is nothing else LeafGuard can do at this time

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: what they failed to mention in their response was that the salesperson assured me the gutter would capture the water in the area in questionNo confusion on my part! I showed him and asked him specifically why I needed the gutters, the water runoff from the roof valleyBut perhaps he just wanted to make a saleThanks for the decorative gutters! I can' believe you would say "customer was confused" very disappointed Not classy at all. Regards,
*** ***

LeafGuard Central Texas, Inc(“LeafGuard”) has investigated the Customer’s complaint regarding getting his LeafGuard gutter system cleaned. The Customer is correct in that when he purchased a LeafGuard gutter system he received a Limited Lifetime No-Clog warranty that states LeafGuard will
clean the Customer’s LeafGuard gutter system if it ever becomes clogged. LeafGuard is looking into why the Customer had a difficult time arranging to have his LeafGuard gutter system clean. There was some type of internal communication error. LeafGuard has contacted the Customer and scheduled a service call to have the Customer’s LeafGuard gutter system cleaned. LeafGuard has verbally apologized and again apologizes to the Customer from any frustration that he has experienced in this matter. The Customer seemed happy with LeafGuard’s response. Accordingly, LeafGuard considers this matter closed

The Customer is inaccurate with many of the details in his complaint.  First, the Customer is inaccurate when he states that the purchase and installation of a LeafGuard gutter system was always to be a finance job.  Prior to the contract being signed, the Customer did attempt to get...

financing from Wells Fargo for the installation of a LeafGuard gutter system.  Yet, Wells Fargo declined his application.  After Wells Fargo decline to provide a loan to the Customer, the Customer decided to proceed anyway with the contract by paying the down payment with a credit card, with the final payment ultimately to be paid by credit card.  Specifically, the Customer’s wife signed a document indicating that LeafGuard Central Texas, Inc. (“LeafGuard”) had the authority to use the same credit card that was used to pay the down payment for the payment of the balance due.  However, when LeafGuard tried to run the credit card, it was declined.  When LeafGuard’s [redacted] asked the Customer’s wife about payment after the credit card was declined, she stated that she did not know why her husband bought the LeafGuard gutter system because they did not have the money for it.  Nevertheless, LeafGuard substantially complied with its contract obligations (see below); so, LeafGuard worked with the Customer and his wife for them to comply with their contractual obligations.  Subsequent to the decline of the credit card, the Customer arranged with another finance company, Enerbank, to finance the balance due.  After a delay caused by the Customer, the Customer signed off on Enerbank’s completion form, indicating that LeafGuard complied with its contractual obligations.  Despite the delay caused by the Customer, Enerbankwould have financed the loan to the Customer except that the Customer’s wife cancelled the loan the day after the Customer submitted the completion form.  She indicated to Enerbank that the contractor, LeafGuard, was going to remove the LeafGuard gutter system so there was nothing for them to pay for.  But, LeafGuard never told either the Customer or his wife that we were going to remove the LeafGuard gutter system.  In his complaint, the Customer implies that LeafGuard waited until he was on trip so it did not have to fully comply with its contractual obligations. LeafGuard can only control its schedule and not a Customer’sschedule.  If the Customer cannot be available and feels he/she needs to be available for the installation, LeafGuard will change its schedule to accommodate the Customer’s schedule.  LeafGuard’s preference is for a customer to be available.  This Customer did not request that LeafGuard postpone the installation of the LeafGuard gutter system because he was going to be on trip.  We would have tried to accommodate him if he had.The Customer contends that LeafGuard did not complete its contractual obligations.  By the Customer’s own actions, this is another inaccuracy within the Customer’s complaint. There was one aspect of the contract that LeafGuard could not do—installing Drainguards because they did not fit the space provided.  But, LeafGuard never had a contractual obligation to make the space compatible for the Drainguards purchased.  The Customer, who is a carpenter, stated to just leave the Drainguards, because he would modify the space so the Drainguards would fit.  So, the Customer did get what he actually requested in the contract—the Drainguards.  Moreover, as noted above, he signed the completion paperwork for Enerback, signifying that LeafGuard completed its contractual obligations.  The Customer indicates in his complaint that his wife was not aware of how the contract was to be paid.  Again, this is inaccurate.  The Customer’s wife signed the contract, which indicates that the down payment was made by credit card.  The Customer’s wife was available for the sales presentation, at which time the original financing request to Wells Fargo was declined.  And, again the Customer’s wife signed the form authorizing LeafGuard to use the credit card.  The documentation contradicts the Customer’s complaint regarding his wife’s lack of knowledge regarding payment.  The Customer’s complaint seems to be a situation of buyer’s remorse.  As the wife has told LeafGuard, she did not believe that they had the money to pay for the LeafGuard gutter system.  It was not until after LeafGuard sought payment of the balance due—and after the Customer's wife cancelled the loan with Enerbank—that the Customer and/or his wife requested that LeafGuard to take down the LeafGuard gutter system.  But, LeafGuard already complied with its contractual obligations.  So, the Customer and his wife should have to also.  LeafGuard should and does expect full payment of the balance due.  Accordingly, LeafGuard did send a letter to the Customer and his wife to make full payment or we would turn the matter over to collections.  It was only after the letter was received by the Customer and his wife when the Customer made this complaint to the Revdex.com.  Clearly, the Customer is hoping to put pressure on LeafGuard to back off on the collections action.  Nevertheless, LeafGuard will continued to seek payment.  Again, the Customer and his wife are legally required to comply with their contractual obligations, as LeafGuard did.

For the fully explained reasons stated in LeafGuard of Central Texas, Inc. (“LeafGuard”) original response, LeafGuard completely agrees with the Customer that the parties are working with each other to amicably resolve this matter.  LeafGuard’s General Manager has now had an opportunity to directly speak with the Customer with the possibility of resolving this matter, and the Customer told the General Manager that she would soon provide LeafGuard with information it needs to resolve this matter.  Thus, this matter should be completely resolved shortly.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Although I have yet to receive reimbursement for the damaged flooring, I have been assured that once they receive my signed Full and Final Release, I will be issued a check.  The signed document was submitted via email today (Jan 17, 2016).
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I'm not sure where the business got their information regarding work being done on my roof. There was no work on my rooface prior you or after the gutter installation. I have yearly inspection and maintenance performed to check for any flashing problems or cracked tiles. Nothing more since my roof, according to my Roofing contactor , is in good condition. I also take offense to the statement on proper weatherstripping on my doors where water leaked in. Since the General Manager never bothered to come and see what was going on, the company cannot make claims of improper maintenance on my part. The water was streaming BEHIND the gutter, as I mentioned in my complaint - streaming down the doors creating a waterfall effect during heavy rains. I am also surprised that now the company is claiming they made no mention of clearing debris from my roof behind the barrier they installed to prevent rain water from creating the waterfall effect in front of my windows. The barrier was their solution and I voiced my concerns on the debris that would fall behind the barrier as it surely will. I believe I am working with the company for an amicable solution. I am not requesting full cost for damaged floor replacement. I am only requesting labor costs.
Regards,
[redacted]