In his response, Mr [redacted] provided a report prepared by [redacted] Engineering that concludes that: "The relative humidity throughout the basement is excessive, which is the result of inadequate mechanical ventilation and air circulation." The report recommends that "...a qualified heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) contractor be consulted regarding improving air circulation and mechanical ventilation of the basement." This is unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed for the customer.We forwarded the [redacted] report to our insurance carrier and asked to to review the case again in light of the report being provided to us, which they did After further review, our insurance carrier has submitted a letter to Mr [redacted] with their conclusion, which is: "Our investigation has revealed that other factors have caused this loss and our insured B-Dry System is not liable Per the [redacted] Engineering report, completed on August 14, 2014, the cause of the mold damage to yur clients basement is the direct result of excessive relative humidity from inadequate ventilation."It is our belief that the fungal growth in this customer's basement is the result of conditions unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed
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 B-Dry’s response to the customer’s complaint contains a number of factual inaccuracies Since 1991, the customer has paid B-Dry over $to stop water leakage in her basement Despite the customer’s patience and reliance on B-Dry, she has ended up having pay an additional $15,in repairs due to B-Dry’s work In 1991, the customer paid B-Dry $to stop leaks in the basement Mold and dampness in the basement continued, despite the fact that the customer has consistently used a dehumidifier rated for the square footage of the basement The HVAC system has been serviced biannually since by [redacted] In the customer paid B-Dry $to do whatever was necessary to correct the dampness in the basement B-Dry removed carpet and installed trenches After B-Dry finished its work, the basement developed a musty smell, and the ceiling and walls developed white mold-like growth By early 2014, the smell from the basement was strongly noticeable whenever the customer stepped into the house from the outside The customer called B-Dry and told it about the mold in the basement B-Dry told the customer that they do not work with mold and instructed the customer to contact [redacted] Services, which inspected the basement and recommended better air circulation It was getting difficult to live in the house due to the smell of the mold, so the customer called ‘ [redacted] the Builder’ contractor [redacted] to come and clean the mold in the basementShe had the carpet and drywall removed and noticed the open trench in the corner with standing water and moldThe underside of the carpet was moldy, and so was the drywallThe customer has retained samples and photographs of the moldy insulation and drywall [redacted] Engineering Co., Incalso documented the mold damage The customer called B-Dry again, and a representative came and saw the damage B-Dry gave an estimate to correct the damage and also install a vapor barrier The repair estimate papers are proof that B-Dry was aware of the damage B-Dry covered up the trench and installed a vapor barrier, charging $ Following B-Dry’s work, all of the moldy drywall and carpeting and insulation was removed The basement was thoroughly cleaned with strong bleach for several days Drywall, carpet and insulation had to be removed The mold and water damage caused by “The B-Dry System” cost the customer $15, While the B-Dry describes this as a “remodeling” cost, a more accurate description would be a repair cost Despite numerous efforts to seek a compromise resolution with B-Dry, the company has stonewalled the customer at every turn Regards, [redacted]
This complaint is inaccurate when it states that BDry installed our waterproofing system incorrectly and that our system failed and resulted in standing water in the basement
We installed our waterproofing system correctly, in compliance with the standards of the industryOur system did not
failWe waterproofed two portions of this basement dating back to and over the years we have received no notifications from the customer that they have experienced water leakage in the areas that we waterproofedWe did suggest to them in that they have the rest of the basement waterproofed, which was leaking at that time, but they decided not toWe also gave them a price in to waterproof the crawlspace, which was leaking at that time, but they decided not toIt appears that other areas of the basement and the crawlspace have leaked over the years, which certainly may have contributed to mold growth, but there is nothing in the record to suggest that the areas repaired by BDry have leaked since the repairs were made
We did not discover an open trench below the flooring" as the complaint allegesThe small (2) gap left in one section of the flooring, under the wooden plate on which the customers paneling was secured, was left there on purpose and was necessary due to the customers wall paneling being up during the waterproofing workThis is common practice when waterproofing a finished basementNo water is present in this small gap and it would not have resulted in widespread mold growth
It is important to note that the customer has provided no proof that the alleged mold and other alleged damage ever even existedThe customer did not claim mold damage, or give us an opportunity to investigate any alleged damage, prior to us being contacted by her attorneyThe first we heard of any alleged damage was when we received a letter from the customers attorney, billing us for the full amount of the remodeling project, which by that time was already completedIf there was in fact damage, and if the customer in fact felt that we were responsible for that damage, surely they would have contacted us as soon as the alleged damage was discovered and prior to proceeding with expensive remedial work
Our insurance company has spoken with the customers attorney several times and asked him to provide proof that mold damage did, indeed, occurOur insurance carrier has also asked the attorney to provide us with an opinion from a mold expert detailing why they think that BDry is responsibleTo date, no proof and no expert opinion has been providedAt this point we have been provided no documentation at all to support the attorneys claims
Without any proof that damage even occurred and given the lack of any substantive evidence that BDry is somehow liable for any damage if it did occur, we cannot accept liability for this claimWe have stated as much to the attorney who filed this complaint several times already
Sincerely,
*** *** |President
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
D-Dry disclaims responsibility for the leaks and the mold in the basement by stating that better ventilation and air circulation could have prevented the mold problem. This argument confuses the cure with the cause. The cause of the mold according to *** Engineering was “excess humidity levels.” The air was too humid because the B-Dry waterproofing system did not work. Better ventilation could have masked the problem by moving moist air out of the basement, but if B-dry had installed a proper waterproofing system, there would have been no need for this fix.
The customer paid more than $9,for the B-Dry system. When the system failed, the customer had to pay another $15,to repair the damage caused by the failure. At this point, the customer has exhausted all reasonable efforts to communicate with the company and its insurer. The customer requests information about the Revdex.com arbitration process. The customer’s contracts with B-Dry do not include a clause for arbitration through an independent entity.
Regards,
*** ***
We received this complaint this week and I cannot file my response online like we always have. We were at this homeowners home on 9/15 and took care of the problem to the homeowners satisfaction. This issue has been resolved. Please contact me if you need any further information...
and please let me know how we can respond online in the future. Thank you
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.
B-Dry’s response to the customer’s complaint contains a number of factual inaccuracies. Since 1991, the customer has paid B-Dry over $9000 to stop water leakage in her basement. Despite the customer’s patience and reliance on B-Dry, she has ended up having pay an additional $15,325 in repairs due to B-Dry’s work.
In 1991, the customer paid B-Dry $1150 to stop leaks in the basement. Mold and dampness in the basement continued, despite the fact that the customer has consistently used a dehumidifier rated for the square footage of the basement. The HVAC system has been serviced biannually since 1984 by [redacted]
In 2011 the customer paid B-Dry $6960 to do whatever was necessary to correct the dampness in the basement. B-Dry removed carpet and installed trenches. After B-Dry finished its work, the basement developed a musty smell, and the ceiling and walls developed white mold-like growth.
By early 2014, the smell from the basement was strongly noticeable whenever the customer stepped into the house from the outside. The customer called B-Dry and told it about the mold in the basement. B-Dry told the customer that they do not work with mold and instructed the customer to contact [redacted] Services, which inspected the basement and recommended better air circulation.
It was getting difficult to live in the house due to the smell of the mold, so the customer called ‘[redacted] the Builder’ contractor [redacted] to come and clean the mold in the basement. She had the carpet and drywall removed and noticed the open trench in the corner with standing water and mold. The underside of the carpet was moldy, and so was the drywall. The customer has retained samples and photographs of the moldy insulation and drywall. [redacted] Engineering Co., Inc. also documented the mold damage. The customer called B-Dry again, and a representative came and saw the damage. B-Dry gave an estimate to correct the damage and also install a vapor barrier. The repair estimate papers are proof that B-Dry was aware of the damage. B-Dry covered up the trench and installed a vapor barrier, charging $945.
Following B-Dry’s work, all of the moldy drywall and carpeting and insulation was removed. The basement was thoroughly cleaned with strong bleach for several days. Drywall, carpet and insulation had to be removed.
The mold and water damage caused by “The B-Dry System” cost the customer $15,325. While the B-Dry describes this as a “remodeling” cost, a more accurate description would be a repair cost. Despite numerous efforts to seek a compromise resolution with B-Dry, the company has stonewalled the customer at every turn.
In his response, Mr. [redacted] provided a report prepared by [redacted] Engineering that concludes that: "The relative humidity throughout the basement is excessive, which is the result of inadequate mechanical ventilation and air circulation." The report recommends that "...a qualified heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) contractor be consulted regarding improving air circulation and mechanical ventilation of the basement." This is unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed for the customer.We forwarded the [redacted] report to our insurance carrier and asked to to review the case again in light of the report being provided to us, which they did. After further review, our insurance carrier has submitted a letter to Mr. [redacted] with their conclusion, which is: "Our investigation has revealed that other factors have caused this loss and our insured B-Dry System is not liable. Per the [redacted] Engineering report, completed on August 14, 2014, the cause of the mold damage to yur clients basement is the direct result of excessive relative humidity from inadequate ventilation."It is our belief that the fungal growth in this customer's basement is the result of conditions unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed.
In his response, Mr [redacted] provided a report prepared by [redacted] Engineering that concludes that: "The relative humidity throughout the basement is excessive, which is the result of inadequate mechanical ventilation and air circulation." The report recommends that "...a qualified heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) contractor be consulted regarding improving air circulation and mechanical ventilation of the basement." This is unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed for the customer.We forwarded the [redacted] report to our insurance carrier and asked to to review the case again in light of the report being provided to us, which they did After further review, our insurance carrier has submitted a letter to Mr [redacted] with their conclusion, which is: "Our investigation has revealed that other factors have caused this loss and our insured B-Dry System is not liable Per the [redacted] Engineering report, completed on August 14, 2014, the cause of the mold damage to yur clients basement is the direct result of excessive relative humidity from inadequate ventilation."It is our belief that the fungal growth in this customer's basement is the result of conditions unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed
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 B-Dry’s response to the customer’s complaint contains a number of factual inaccuracies Since 1991, the customer has paid B-Dry over $to stop water leakage in her basement Despite the customer’s patience and reliance on B-Dry, she has ended up having pay an additional $15,in repairs due to B-Dry’s work In 1991, the customer paid B-Dry $to stop leaks in the basement Mold and dampness in the basement continued, despite the fact that the customer has consistently used a dehumidifier rated for the square footage of the basement The HVAC system has been serviced biannually since by [redacted] In the customer paid B-Dry $to do whatever was necessary to correct the dampness in the basement B-Dry removed carpet and installed trenches After B-Dry finished its work, the basement developed a musty smell, and the ceiling and walls developed white mold-like growth By early 2014, the smell from the basement was strongly noticeable whenever the customer stepped into the house from the outside The customer called B-Dry and told it about the mold in the basement B-Dry told the customer that they do not work with mold and instructed the customer to contact [redacted] Services, which inspected the basement and recommended better air circulation It was getting difficult to live in the house due to the smell of the mold, so the customer called ‘ [redacted] the Builder’ contractor [redacted] to come and clean the mold in the basementShe had the carpet and drywall removed and noticed the open trench in the corner with standing water and moldThe underside of the carpet was moldy, and so was the drywallThe customer has retained samples and photographs of the moldy insulation and drywall [redacted] Engineering Co., Incalso documented the mold damage The customer called B-Dry again, and a representative came and saw the damage B-Dry gave an estimate to correct the damage and also install a vapor barrier The repair estimate papers are proof that B-Dry was aware of the damage B-Dry covered up the trench and installed a vapor barrier, charging $ Following B-Dry’s work, all of the moldy drywall and carpeting and insulation was removed The basement was thoroughly cleaned with strong bleach for several days Drywall, carpet and insulation had to be removed The mold and water damage caused by “The B-Dry System” cost the customer $15, While the B-Dry describes this as a “remodeling” cost, a more accurate description would be a repair cost Despite numerous efforts to seek a compromise resolution with B-Dry, the company has stonewalled the customer at every turn Regards, [redacted]
This complaint is inaccurate when it states that BDry installed our waterproofing system incorrectly and that our system failed and resulted in standing water in the basement
We installed our waterproofing system correctly, in compliance with the standards of the industryOur system did not
failWe waterproofed two portions of this basement dating back to and over the years we have received no notifications from the customer that they have experienced water leakage in the areas that we waterproofedWe did suggest to them in that they have the rest of the basement waterproofed, which was leaking at that time, but they decided not toWe also gave them a price in to waterproof the crawlspace, which was leaking at that time, but they decided not toIt appears that other areas of the basement and the crawlspace have leaked over the years, which certainly may have contributed to mold growth, but there is nothing in the record to suggest that the areas repaired by BDry have leaked since the repairs were made
We did not discover an open trench below the flooring" as the complaint allegesThe small (2) gap left in one section of the flooring, under the wooden plate on which the customers paneling was secured, was left there on purpose and was necessary due to the customers wall paneling being up during the waterproofing workThis is common practice when waterproofing a finished basementNo water is present in this small gap and it would not have resulted in widespread mold growth
It is important to note that the customer has provided no proof that the alleged mold and other alleged damage ever even existedThe customer did not claim mold damage, or give us an opportunity to investigate any alleged damage, prior to us being contacted by her attorneyThe first we heard of any alleged damage was when we received a letter from the customers attorney, billing us for the full amount of the remodeling project, which by that time was already completedIf there was in fact damage, and if the customer in fact felt that we were responsible for that damage, surely they would have contacted us as soon as the alleged damage was discovered and prior to proceeding with expensive remedial work
Our insurance company has spoken with the customers attorney several times and asked him to provide proof that mold damage did, indeed, occurOur insurance carrier has also asked the attorney to provide us with an opinion from a mold expert detailing why they think that BDry is responsibleTo date, no proof and no expert opinion has been providedAt this point we have been provided no documentation at all to support the attorneys claims
Without any proof that damage even occurred and given the lack of any substantive evidence that BDry is somehow liable for any damage if it did occur, we cannot accept liability for this claimWe have stated as much to the attorney who filed this complaint several times already
Sincerely,
*** *** |President
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
D-Dry disclaims responsibility for the leaks and the mold in the basement by stating that better ventilation and air circulation could have prevented the mold problem. This argument confuses the cure with the cause. The cause of the mold according to *** Engineering was “excess humidity levels.” The air was too humid because the B-Dry waterproofing system did not work. Better ventilation could have masked the problem by moving moist air out of the basement, but if B-dry had installed a proper waterproofing system, there would have been no need for this fix.
The customer paid more than $9,for the B-Dry system. When the system failed, the customer had to pay another $15,to repair the damage caused by the failure. At this point, the customer has exhausted all reasonable efforts to communicate with the company and its insurer. The customer requests information about the Revdex.com arbitration process. The customer’s contracts with B-Dry do not include a clause for arbitration through an independent entity.
Regards,
*** ***
We received this complaint this week and I cannot file my response online like we always have. We were at this homeowners home on 9/15 and took care of the problem to the homeowners satisfaction. This issue has been resolved. Please contact me if you need any further information...
and please let me know how we can respond online in the future. Thank you
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.
B-Dry’s response to the customer’s complaint contains a number of factual inaccuracies. Since 1991, the customer has paid B-Dry over $9000 to stop water leakage in her basement. Despite the customer’s patience and reliance on B-Dry, she has ended up having pay an additional $15,325 in repairs due to B-Dry’s work.
In 1991, the customer paid B-Dry $1150 to stop leaks in the basement. Mold and dampness in the basement continued, despite the fact that the customer has consistently used a dehumidifier rated for the square footage of the basement. The HVAC system has been serviced biannually since 1984 by [redacted]
In 2011 the customer paid B-Dry $6960 to do whatever was necessary to correct the dampness in the basement. B-Dry removed carpet and installed trenches. After B-Dry finished its work, the basement developed a musty smell, and the ceiling and walls developed white mold-like growth.
By early 2014, the smell from the basement was strongly noticeable whenever the customer stepped into the house from the outside. The customer called B-Dry and told it about the mold in the basement. B-Dry told the customer that they do not work with mold and instructed the customer to contact [redacted] Services, which inspected the basement and recommended better air circulation.
It was getting difficult to live in the house due to the smell of the mold, so the customer called ‘[redacted] the Builder’ contractor [redacted] to come and clean the mold in the basement. She had the carpet and drywall removed and noticed the open trench in the corner with standing water and mold. The underside of the carpet was moldy, and so was the drywall. The customer has retained samples and photographs of the moldy insulation and drywall. [redacted] Engineering Co., Inc. also documented the mold damage. The customer called B-Dry again, and a representative came and saw the damage. B-Dry gave an estimate to correct the damage and also install a vapor barrier. The repair estimate papers are proof that B-Dry was aware of the damage. B-Dry covered up the trench and installed a vapor barrier, charging $945.
Following B-Dry’s work, all of the moldy drywall and carpeting and insulation was removed. The basement was thoroughly cleaned with strong bleach for several days. Drywall, carpet and insulation had to be removed.
The mold and water damage caused by “The B-Dry System” cost the customer $15,325. While the B-Dry describes this as a “remodeling” cost, a more accurate description would be a repair cost. Despite numerous efforts to seek a compromise resolution with B-Dry, the company has stonewalled the customer at every turn.
Regards,
[redacted]
In his response, Mr. [redacted] provided a report prepared by [redacted] Engineering that concludes that: "The relative humidity throughout the basement is excessive, which is the result of inadequate mechanical ventilation and air circulation." The report recommends that "...a qualified heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) contractor be consulted regarding improving air circulation and mechanical ventilation of the basement." This is unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed for the customer.We forwarded the [redacted] report to our insurance carrier and asked to to review the case again in light of the report being provided to us, which they did. After further review, our insurance carrier has submitted a letter to Mr. [redacted] with their conclusion, which is: "Our investigation has revealed that other factors have caused this loss and our insured B-Dry System is not liable. Per the [redacted] Engineering report, completed on August 14, 2014, the cause of the mold damage to yur clients basement is the direct result of excessive relative humidity from inadequate ventilation."It is our belief that the fungal growth in this customer's basement is the result of conditions unrelated to the work that B-Dry performed.