Burkholder Brothers, Incorporated

December 11, 2015To Whom It May Concern,I received [redacted] response from youI just want to state my side of the complaint [redacted] called us and asked us for a price to replace a timer from his existing one to one that was WifiWe have done this with other clients and it is a simple swap of a sprinkler timerWe told him it would take about an hour and costs $ [redacted] accepted this price and scheduled the work to be done.When my tech arrived at his home, his existing timer was located outsideWe could install this new timer outside, enclosed in a special box, but he wanted it installed in the basementMy tech informed him that it would costs more as it would take more time to do this and there would also be material used as we would have to extend the control wires from outside into his basement [redacted] was okay with this[redacted] claims that it should not have taken as long as it should have and does not want to pay the entire costs of the billIn speaking with my tech about the issue he wanted to do it a certain way that would have been the most efficient, but [redacted] was showing him how to do his jobIn reality the bill should have been as follows: Sprinkler timer (our cost $253) marked up 30% $(see invoice, document 1) Labor hours: First min $90, each additional hour $(Total $315) Additional Materials or wire, waterproof wire connectors and junction box ($75) Total bill would have been $720I was more than fair by discounting his bill and making it only $I have an email chain that is also included that I have highlighted parts that show our communication as [redacted] claims refused to talk with himDocument shows his email to my office manager and my response to that is document On July he said he never heard from me after sent him an email one month prior and took it in his own hands to deduct $off the billSee document [redacted] claims an issue about a head installed in a neighbor's yardWe installed this system in The neighborhood and was new and still under construction and there were stakes for the property lines that were in placeAt some point when Toll Brothers was finalizing the neighborhood they resurveyed and staked all the properties and they were not in the same placeI know this as we installed sprinklers for many neighbors just next door to him and they all had to have their sprinkler heads moved as the original stakes were not properly locatedThis was not our fault.Lastly Document is an email from December [redacted] always has to mention that he spread the word for me to get more work in the neighborhood, and I feel he thinks I owe him something for thatI do think it is great and thoughtful for him to do that and showed my gratitude many times by giving him discounts on service in the past and even on this workBut I do not think it is fair where he can dictate what he pays for the work he request.Mark B

Date Sent: 12/28/12:00:AMPlease see attached

October 31, 2014To whom it may concern, This complaint by [redacted] is not valid [redacted] signed up for a service agreement in April that included a start up of his sprinkler system and a winterization in the fallOn April 29, on of my service techs came to his house and performed a start up that was included with his agreementWhen my tech was finished the startup he spoke with [redacted] and wrote up on the paperwork some suggestions to improve the systemI have sent that paperwork for you to see.My tech's are instructed never to perform additional work unless it is reviewed with the customer and signed off to do the workI have spoken to my tech about this several times and he clearly spoke with [redacted] about the estimate to do the improvements and what the total cost would be with the discount we give to customers who sign up for agreementsI have also included a chain of emails that went back and forth between [redacted] and me.If you look at our records I do not know of any complaints for us acting fraudulently and myself or my company taking advantage of anyoneWe have been in business for almost years and I never had an issue with customers claiming we did anything fraudulentFurthermore my techs that perform sprinkler service will never do repairs that cost additional money for the customer unless it is approved and discussed with the customer beforehandCompany policy also is that if a customer has an open balance we will not perform a winterization until we are paid in fullSince [redacted] refused to pay the $91,decided to subtract that amount from the contract paid for and sent him the difference by check on October 10, Thanks you, Mark B

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Please see attached detailed explanation Response is not factual.Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: December 21, 2015At the outset, I would like to admit that in hindsight trying to approach this issue diplomatically by pressing for discount was a faulty approach on my partI should have directly gone to the step of disputingSo my apologies for thatNevertheless, I am still pressing that Burkholder's inflated the labor hours.Let me point out my concerns to the response that I have receivedI have put number annotation in the attached copy of Mark's response and my notes for each of the number are appended below.Comment 1Mark's comment "we could have installed outside using the a special box"1)Why didn't Burkholder provide an estimate for that box?2)Why does the [redacted] order enclosed by Mark not show that box?3)Why did Mark's not handover the box (assuming he had purchased it) to me? Rightfully it belongs to me whether it was used or not.4)Simply stated that the design was not through by Burkholders.5)Reality is that me asking for indoor to outdoor is a blessing in disguise.6)Lastly, Mark realized about the need for the outdoor box only after I pointed it out.7)Comment 2"Nathan was showing the way"Absolutely a allegation by the technicianSequence of conversation was as follows:1)I asked for indoor install, to which the technician responded that he did not have concrete drill2)I showed the place where the dish satellite wires were coming from outdoor and said that drilling in that wood area would not require concrete drill3)When I go out after minutes and check, technician is struggling to push the wire through the make shift drillHe tried fishing and eventually gave up.4)That's when I said drill next to the satellite and finish up the work.5)Had I not challenged, he would have been still been spending time and wasting labor hours6)On a side note, I seriously doubt the integrity of the technician because he promised to come next day and caulk and did not keep up the promise nor did he inform me he could not make it.7)Bottom-line, if I showing the wood area is construed as me giving direction, I would say had he followed the instruction the drilling in the wood area the first time the whole drilling operation would have been done in minutes.8)Enclosing the documents that I faxed to Mark on 10/05/which has all the pictures.Very clever of Mark to make up a cost sheet to show an imaginary discountI have proof from Mark that the original (outdoor install) estimate was for parts and hour of labor and this estimate was $Going by Mark's response that the marked up part price is $329, means the one hour labor is $(375-329)In Mark's response, first minutes is generally times of subsequent minutes intervalsTherefore, $for hour would be $for first minutes and $for the second minutes - adding to $(rounded up for the ease of math).Applying those rates to increased scope of work the invoice should have been:Timer $329Additional parts $753hours of labor First minutes $32Next 2-1/hours (5*16) $80Total $516Going by this, I actually have overpaid Mark by $or so (note I have already paid $530).Comment4"Survey was redone by Toll Bros"1)Very interesting that Mark should come out now and say that Toll Bros did a re-surveyWhy that was not said when I made the original statement, that Burkholder installed the sprinkler in neighbor's yardI have response from Burkholder saying that they refuse to service this issueSo it makes me wonder about the validity of the statement about the resurvey.2)This whole issue of my sprinkler in neighbor's yard came up when my neighbor did a survey to install his fenceI can assure you that there is absolutely not even a millimeter difference between the survey (at the time of my house closing) and the survey my neighbor didOnce again, I wonder if the Toll Bros allegation of resurvey is a statement of fact.3)Also surveys are done only when properties buyers ask for it so it is a cost and a requested service during real estate closureToll bros does not survey all property by default.In summary lot of accumulated events that making me press the issue:1)Sprinkler in neighbor's yard2)My backyard neighbor's sprinkler in my yard3)Ineffective rain sensor install (on this Mark and I have a difference of opinion - we can agree to disagree but I challenge Mark to show some documentation that substantiates his statement about I chose cheaper install option and hence rain sensor is compromisedAny professional would not sign up for a compromised installation to provide lower quote without putting the pros and cons in a piece of paper.)4)Deflecting the issue of fixing the sprinkler instead of professionally discussing and coming to a resolution.5)Incomplete design in the current project i.enot thinking through the need for outdoor box.The way I see the math is as follows:1) Invoice from Burkholder $6102) Corrected invoice applying labor rates derived from Mark's letter of 12/11/$5163) Paid by Nathan $5304) Due to Nathan $145) Out of pocket charges incurred by Nathan for incomplete work (time & part for caulk) $406) Out of pocket to fix sprinkler in neighbor yard $1257) Due to Nathan (4+5+6) $179I am open to alternatives but will not be open to the alternative of Mark insisting on the original invoice of$610.Regards, [redacted]

November 5, 2014To whom it May Concern.I received *** ***'s response from youClearly, as I see it, you can see that *** *** is not telling the truthFrom his original complaint he says that no one ever discussed anything about additional chargesBut as you can clearly see from the work order it was discussed with him, he signed and spoke to my tech that day to do the extra workThe additional work was completed that same dayIf you look at the top of the work order just below the date of 4/29/we have a time slot, arrival and finish time, My tech finished his start up at 12:Then spoke with *** *** about some improvements that could be done to the system*** *** said okay, signed the paperwork and that is why my tech stayed at the job minutes longer to complete the additional work (you can see he scratched out the 12:and below that put 1:25)I did not cut anything off the work order and can provide you with the original one if you would likeBetter yet, my tech left a Copy with *** *** as we only have the carbon copy from the work orderThis is also company policy to leave the first copy of the work order with the customerWhy doesn't *** *** provide the original copy without the signed additional work sisted as he claims? It would also be blank at the bottom if he is claiming we filled this in afterwardsI believe if he can provide this then you can call me fraudulentBut I know for a fact that he does not have paperwork saying what he is statingHonestly I could care less about $92, But when someone authorizes us to do something and is clearly just trying to get out of paying for it that does not sit well with meThe fact the he or anyone would believe that we were trying to fraudulently take $from someone is absurdAlso some other items that are not true as I look at his original complaint are that he states he paid $and is disputing $I will include the original invoice that shows that the contract is only $205, which includes start up and shut down servicesThe additional service that we did was $Maybe *** *** is not lying, but as he states he is a senior, Not sure, but maybe he may be having trouble remembering things at his ageIf that is the case I do feel bad for thinking he is a liar.Sincerely,
Mark B

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: MrBurkholder (attachment) cut off the bottom part of the invoice where I CLEARLY signed on the line just below, where it reads I do NOT want any work or repairs to be done As you can see, MrBurkholder intentionally did NOT send the entire page in his response because he is acting fraudulently with you too I believe they completed the invoice with repair numbers at a later date than I originally signed because the indicated work done was NOT authorized by me
Regards,
*** ***

December 11, To Whom It May Concern,I received *** *** response from youI just want to state my side of the complaint*** called us and asked us for a price to replace a timer from his existing one to one that was WifiWe have done this with other clients and it
is a simple swap of a sprinkler timerWe told him it would take about an hour and costs $*** accepted this price and scheduled the work to be done.When my tech arrived at his home, his existing timer was located outsideWe could install this new timer outside, enclosed in a special box, but he wanted it installed in the basementMy tech informed him that it would costs more as it would take more time to do this and there would also be material used as we would have to extend the control wires from outside into his basement*** was okay with this*** claims that it should not have taken as long as it should have and does not want to pay the entire costs of the billIn speaking with my tech about the issue he wanted to do it a certain way that would have been the most efficient, but *** was showing him how to do his jobIn reality the bill should have been as follows:
Sprinkler timer (our cost $253) marked up 30% $(see invoice, document 1)
Labor hours: First min $90, each additional hour $(Total $315)
Additional Materials or wire, waterproof wire connectors and junction box ($75)
Total bill would have been $I was more than fair by discounting his bill and making it only $I have an email chain that is also included that I have highlighted parts that show our communication as *** claims refused to talk with himDocument shows his email to my office manager and my response to that is document On July he said he never heard from me after sent him an email one month prior and took it in his own hands to deduct $off the billSee document *** claims an issue about a head installed in a neighbor's yardWe installed this system in The neighborhood and was new and still under construction and there were stakes for the property lines that were in placeAt some point when Toll Brothers was finalizing the neighborhood they resurveyed and staked all the properties and they were not in the same placeI know this as we installed sprinklers for many neighbors just next door to him and they all had to have their sprinkler heads moved as the original stakes were not properly locatedThis was not our faultLastly Document is an email from December *** always has to mention that he spread the word for me to get more work in the neighborhood, and I feel he thinks I owe him something for thatI do think it is great and thoughtful for him to do that and showed my gratitude many times by giving him discounts on service in the past and even on this workBut I do not think it is fair where he can dictate what he pays for the work he requestMark B

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Please see attached detailed explanation.  Response is not factual.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
December 21, 2015At the outset, I would like to admit that in hindsight trying to approach this issue diplomatically by pressing for discount was a faulty approach on my part. I should have directly gone to the step of disputing. So my apologies for that. Nevertheless, I am still pressing that Burkholder's inflated the labor hours.Let me point out my concerns to the response that I have received. I have put number annotation in the attached copy of Mark's response and my notes for each of the number are appended below.Comment 1Mark's comment "we could have installed outside using the a special box"1)Why didn't Burkholder provide an estimate for that box?2)Why does the [redacted] order enclosed by Mark not show that box?3)Why did Mark's not handover the box (assuming he had purchased it) to me? Rightfully it belongs to me whether it was used or not.4)Simply stated that the design was not through by Burkholders.5)Reality is that me asking for indoor to outdoor is a blessing in disguise.6)Lastly, Mark realized about the need for the outdoor box only after I pointed it out.7)Comment 2"Nathan was showing the way"Absolutely a false allegation by the technician. Sequence of conversation was as follows:1)I asked for indoor install, to which the technician responded that he did not have concrete drill2)I showed the place where the dish satellite wires were coming from outdoor and said that drilling in that wood area would not require concrete drill3)When I go out after 45 minutes and check, technician is struggling to push the wire through the make shift drill. He tried fishing and eventually gave up.4)That's when I said drill next to the satellite and finish up the work.5)Had I not challenged, he would have been still been spending time and wasting labor hours6)On a side note, I seriously doubt the integrity of the technician because he promised to come next day and caulk and did not keep up the promise nor did he inform me he could not make it.7)Bottom-line, if I showing the wood area is construed as me giving direction, I would say had he followed the instruction the drilling in the wood area the first time the whole drilling operation would have been done in 5 minutes.8)Enclosing the documents that I faxed to Mark on 10/05/2015 which has all the pictures.Very clever of Mark to make up a cost sheet to show an imaginary discount. I have proof from Mark that the original (outdoor install) estimate was for parts and 1 hour of labor and this estimate was $375. Going by Mark's response that the marked up part price is $329, means the one hour labor is $46 (375-329). In Mark's response, first 30 minutes is generally 2 times of subsequent 30 minutes intervals. Therefore, $46 for 1 hour would be $32 for first 30 minutes and $16 for the second 30 minutes - adding to $48 (rounded up for the ease of math).Applying those rates to increased scope of work the invoice should have been:Timer $329Additional parts $753hours of labor First 30 minutes $32Next 2-1/2 hours (5*16) $80Total $516Going by this, I actually have overpaid Mark by $20 or so (note I have already paid $530).Comment4"Survey was redone by Toll Bros"1)Very interesting that Mark should come out now and say that Toll Bros did a re-survey. Why that was not said when I made the original statement, that Burkholder installed the sprinkler in neighbor's yard. I have response from Burkholder saying that they refuse to service this issue. So it makes me wonder about the validity of the statement about the resurvey.2)This whole issue of my sprinkler in neighbor's yard came up when my neighbor did a survey to install his fence. I can assure you that there is absolutely not even a millimeter difference between the 2009 survey (at the time of my house closing) and the survey my neighbor did. Once again, I wonder if the Toll Bros allegation of resurvey is a statement of fact.3)Also surveys are done only when properties buyers ask for it so it is a cost and a requested service during real estate closure. Toll bros does not survey all property by default.In summary lot of accumulated events that making me press the issue:1)Sprinkler in neighbor's yard2)My backyard neighbor's sprinkler in my yard3)Ineffective rain sensor install (on this Mark and I have a difference of opinion - we can agree to disagree but I challenge Mark to show some documentation that substantiates his statement about I chose cheaper install option and hence rain sensor is compromised. Any professional would not sign up for a compromised installation to provide lower quote without putting the pros and cons in a piece of paper.)4)Deflecting the issue of fixing the sprinkler instead of professionally discussing and coming to a resolution.5)Incomplete design in the current project i.e. not thinking through the need for outdoor box.The way I see the math is as follows:1) Invoice from Burkholder $6102) Corrected invoice applying labor rates derived from Mark's letter of 12/11/2015 $5163) Paid by Nathan $5304) Due to Nathan $145) Out of pocket charges incurred by Nathan for incomplete work (time & part for caulk) $406) Out of pocket to fix sprinkler in neighbor yard $1257) Due to Nathan (4+5+6) $179I am open to alternatives but will not be open to the alternative of Mark insisting on the original invoice of$610.Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Please see attached detailed explanation.  Response is not factual.Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
December 21, 2015At the outset, I would like to admit that in hindsight trying to approach this issue diplomatically by pressing for discount was a faulty approach on my part. I should have directly gone to the step of disputing. So my apologies for that. Nevertheless, I am still pressing that Burkholder's inflated the labor hours.Let me point out my concerns to the response that I have received. I have put number annotation in the attached copy of Mark's response and my notes for each of the number are appended below.Comment 1Mark's comment "we could have installed outside using the a special box"1)Why didn't Burkholder provide an estimate for that box?2)Why does the [redacted] order enclosed by Mark not show that box?3)Why did Mark's not handover the box (assuming he had purchased it) to me? Rightfully it belongs to me whether it was used or not.4)Simply stated that the design was not through by Burkholders.5)Reality is that me asking for indoor to outdoor is a blessing in disguise.6)Lastly, Mark realized about the need for the outdoor box only after I pointed it out.7)Comment 2"Nathan was showing the way"Absolutely a false allegation by the technician. Sequence of conversation was as follows:1)I asked for indoor install, to which the technician responded that he did not have concrete drill2)I showed the place where the dish satellite wires were coming from outdoor and said that drilling in that wood area would not require concrete drill3)When I go out after 45 minutes and check, technician is struggling to push the wire through the make shift drill. He tried fishing and eventually gave up.4)That's when I said drill next to the satellite and finish up the work.5)Had I not challenged, he would have been still been spending time and wasting labor hours6)On a side note, I seriously doubt the integrity of the technician because he promised to come next day and caulk and did not keep up the promise nor did he inform me he could not make it.7)Bottom-line, if I showing the wood area is construed as me giving direction, I would say had he followed the instruction the drilling in the wood area the first time the whole drilling operation would have been done in 5 minutes.8)Enclosing the documents that I faxed to Mark on 10/05/2015 which has all the pictures.Very clever of Mark to make up a cost sheet to show an imaginary discount. I have proof from Mark that the original (outdoor install) estimate was for parts and 1 hour of labor and this estimate was $375. Going by Mark's response that the marked up part price is $329, means the one hour labor is $46 (375-329). In Mark's response, first 30 minutes is generally 2 times of subsequent 30 minutes intervals. Therefore, $46 for 1 hour would be $32 for first 30 minutes and $16 for the second 30 minutes - adding to $48 (rounded up for the ease of math).Applying those rates to increased scope of work the invoice should have been:Timer $329Additional parts $753hours of labor First 30 minutes $32Next 2-1/2 hours (5*16) $80Total $516Going by this, I actually have overpaid Mark by $20 or so (note I have already paid $530).Comment4"Survey was redone by Toll Bros"1)Very interesting that Mark should come out now and say that Toll Bros did a re-survey. Why that was not said when I made the original statement, that Burkholder installed the sprinkler in neighbor's yard. I have response from Burkholder saying that they refuse to service this issue. So it makes me wonder about the validity of the statement about the resurvey.2)This whole issue of my sprinkler in neighbor's yard came up when my neighbor did a survey to install his fence. I can assure you that there is absolutely not even a millimeter difference between the 2009 survey (at the time of my house closing) and the survey my neighbor did. Once again, I wonder if the Toll Bros allegation of resurvey is a statement of fact.3)Also surveys are done only when properties buyers ask for it so it is a cost and a requested service during real estate closure. Toll bros does not survey all property by default.In summary lot of accumulated events that making me press the issue:1)Sprinkler in neighbor's yard2)My backyard neighbor's sprinkler in my yard3)Ineffective rain sensor install (on this Mark and I have a difference of opinion - we can agree to disagree but I challenge Mark to show some documentation that substantiates his statement about I chose cheaper install option and hence rain sensor is compromised. Any professional would not sign up for a compromised installation to provide lower quote without putting the pros and cons in a piece of paper.)4)Deflecting the issue of fixing the sprinkler instead of professionally discussing and coming to a resolution.5)Incomplete design in the current project i.e. not thinking through the need for outdoor box.The way I see the math is as follows:1) Invoice from Burkholder $6102) Corrected invoice applying labor rates derived from Mark's letter of 12/11/2015 $5163) Paid by Nathan $5304) Due to Nathan $145) Out of pocket charges incurred by Nathan for incomplete work (time & part for caulk) $406) Out of pocket to fix sprinkler in neighbor yard $1257) Due to Nathan (4+5+6) $179I am open to alternatives but will not be open to the alternative of Mark insisting on the original invoice of$610.Regards,
[redacted]

December 11, 2015To Whom It May Concern,I received [redacted] response from you. I just want to state my side of the complaint. [redacted] called us and asked us for a price to replace a timer from his existing one to one that was Wifi. We have done this with other clients and it is a simple...

swap of a sprinkler timer. We told him it would take about an hour and costs $375. [redacted] accepted this price and scheduled the work to be done.When my tech arrived at his home, his existing timer was located outside. We could install this new timer outside, enclosed in a special box, but he wanted it installed in the basement. My tech informed him that it would costs more as it would take more time to do this and there would also be material used as we would have to extend the control wires from outside into his basement. [redacted] was okay with this.[redacted] claims that it should not have taken as long as it should have and does not want to pay the entire costs of the bill. In speaking with my tech about the issue he wanted to do it a certain way that would have been the most efficient, but [redacted] was showing him how to do his job. In reality the bill should have been as follows:  Sprinkler timer (our cost $253) marked up 30% $329 (see invoice, document 1)  Labor 3 hours: First 30 min $90, each additional 4 hour $45 (Total $315)   Additional Materials or wire, waterproof wire connectors and junction box ($75)   Total bill would have been $720I was more than fair by discounting his bill and making it only $610. I have an email chain that is also included that I have highlighted parts that show our communication as [redacted] claims refused to talk with him. Document 2 shows his email to my office manager and my response to that is document 3. On July 14 he said he never heard from me after sent him an email one month prior and took it in his own hands to deduct $80 off the bill. See document 4.[redacted] claims an issue about a head installed in a neighbor's yard. We installed this system in 2009. The neighborhood and was new and still under construction and there were stakes for the property lines that were in place. At some point when Toll Brothers was finalizing the neighborhood they resurveyed and staked all the properties and they were not in the same place. I know this as we installed sprinklers for many neighbors just next door to him and they all had to have their sprinkler heads moved as the original stakes were not properly located. This was not our fault.Lastly Document 5 is an email from December 5. [redacted] always has to mention that he spread the word for me to get more work in the neighborhood, and I feel he thinks I owe him something for that. I do think it is great and thoughtful for him to do that and showed my gratitude many times by giving him discounts on service in the past and even on this work. But I do not think it is fair where he can dictate what he pays for the work he request.Mark B

Date Sent: 12/28/2015 12:00:00 AMPlease see attached.

October 31, 2014To whom it may concern,
This complaint by [redacted] is not valid. [redacted] signed up for a service agreement in April that included a start up of his sprinkler system and a winterization in the fall. On April 29, 2014 on of my service techs came to his house...

and performed a start up that was included with his agreement. When my tech was finished the startup he spoke with [redacted] and wrote up on the paperwork some suggestions to improve the system. I have sent that paperwork for you to see.My tech's are instructed never to perform additional work unless it is reviewed with the customer and signed off to do the work. I have spoken to my tech about this several times and he clearly spoke with [redacted] about the estimate to do the improvements and what the total cost would be with the discount we give to customers who sign up for agreements. I have also included a chain of emails that went back and forth between [redacted] and me.If you look at our records I do not know of any complaints for us acting fraudulently and myself or my company taking advantage of anyone. We have been in business for almost 20 years and I never had an issue with customers claiming we did anything fraudulent. Furthermore my techs that perform sprinkler service will never do repairs that cost additional money for the customer unless it is approved and discussed with the customer beforehand.
Company policy also is that if a customer has an open balance we will not perform a winterization until we are paid in full. Since [redacted] refused to pay the $91,801 decided to subtract that amount from the contract paid for and sent him the difference by check on October 10, 2014.
Thanks you,
Mark B

Review: I pre-paid for SPring start up and fall winterization. Co never disclosed amount of additional work or the need for additional work to be done and is billing me $92 and will NOT perform winterization of irrigation system until balance is paid. I signed the contract the day the spring work was done and no additional charges were discussed, disclosed or authorized by me. I now have to find and pay new co to do the work before pipes freeze. [redacted] said they will issue me a partial refund, only after educating $92. I am on a fixed income and senior and feel they are taking advantage of me. The owner is NOT giving an inch and I believe is acting fraudulently.Desired Settlement: Refund my full amount for the winterization without paying a false fee of $92.00.

Business

Response:

October 31, 2014To whom it may concern,This complaint by [redacted] is not valid. [redacted] signed up for a service agreement in April that included a start up of his sprinkler system and a winterization in the fall. On April 29, 2014 on of my service techs came to his house and performed a start up that was included with his agreement. When my tech was finished the startup he spoke with [redacted] and wrote up on the paperwork some suggestions to improve the system. I have sent that paperwork for you to see.My tech's are instructed never to perform additional work unless it is reviewed with the customer and signed off to do the work. I have spoken to my tech about this several times and he clearly spoke with [redacted] about the estimate to do the improvements and what the total cost would be with the discount we give to customers who sign up for agreements. I have also included a chain of emails that went back and forth between [redacted] and me.If you look at our records I do not know of any complaints for us acting fraudulently and myself or my company taking advantage of anyone. We have been in business for almost 20 years and I never had an issue with customers claiming we did anything fraudulent. Furthermore my techs that perform sprinkler service will never do repairs that cost additional money for the customer unless it is approved and discussed with the customer beforehand.Company policy also is that if a customer has an open balance we will not perform a winterization until we are paid in full. Since [redacted] refused to pay the $91,801 decided to subtract that amount from the contract paid for and sent him the difference by check on October 10, 2014.Thanks you,Mark B

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: Mr. Burkholder (attachment) cut off the bottom part of the invoice where I CLEARLY signed on the line just below, where it reads I do NOT want any work or repairs to be done. As you can see, Mr. Burkholder intentionally did NOT send the entire page in his response because he is acting fraudulently with you too. I believe they completed the invoice with repair numbers at a later date than I originally signed because the indicated work done was NOT authorized by me.

Regards,

Business

Response:

November 5, 2014To whom it May Concern.I received [redacted]'s response from you. Clearly, as I see it, you can see that [redacted] is not telling the truth. From his original complaint he says that no one ever discussed anything about additional charges. But as you can clearly see from the work order it was discussed with him, he signed and spoke to my tech that day to do the extra work. The additional work was completed that same day. If you look at the top of the work order just below the date of 4/29/2014 we have a time slot, arrival and finish time, My tech finished his start up at 12:55. Then spoke with [redacted] about some improvements that could be done to the system. [redacted] said okay, signed the paperwork and that is why my tech stayed at the job 30 minutes longer to complete the additional work (you can see he scratched out the 12:55 and below that put 1:25).I did not cut anything off the work order and can provide you with the original one if you would like. Better yet, my tech left a Copy with [redacted] as we only have the carbon copy from the work order. This is also company policy to leave the first copy of the work order with the customer. Why doesn't [redacted] provide the original copy without the signed additional work sisted as he claims? It would also be blank at the bottom if he is claiming we filled this in afterwards. I believe if he can provide this then you can call me fraudulent. But I know for a fact that he does not have paperwork saying what he is stating.Honestly I could care less about $92, But when someone authorizes us to do something and is clearly just trying to get out of paying for it that does not sit well with me. The fact the he or anyone would believe that we were trying to fraudulently take $92 from someone is absurd. Also some other items that are not true as I look at his original complaint are that he states he paid $250 and is disputing $125. I will include the original invoice that shows that the contract is only $205, which includes start up and shut down services. The additional service that we did was $91.80.Maybe [redacted] is not lying, but as he states he is a senior, Not sure, but maybe he may be having trouble remembering things at his age. If that is the case I do feel bad for thinking he is a liar.Sincerely,Mark B