WE RECEIVED YOUR NOTICE REGARDING THE SERVICE CALL AT MR***'S HOME ON SATURDAY, MARCH 21, THlS SERVICEREQUEST WAS A RESULT OF A CLAIM ON THE HOMEOWNER'S WARRANTYAGREEMENT WITH *** *** HOME SERVICESTHE HOMEOWNERWAS AWARE OF A $DEDUCTIBLE ON THIS CLAIMHE SHOULD NOTHAVE BEEN
SURPRISED THAT A SERVICE FEE WOULD BE DUE.THE TECHNICIAN WAS TOLD THAT THE CLICKING PROBLEM HAPPENEDONLY AFTER THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE RANGEIT MAY RE DUE T0THE BURNER BEING SPRAYED WITH CLEANER WHICH WOULD HAVECAUSED THE BURNER TO CLICK UNTIL IT DRIED FROM THE CLEANERTHEPROBLEM DID NOT HAPPEN WHEN OUR TECHNICIAN WAS IN THE HOMEIFTHE RANGE DID NOT MALFUNCTION WHEN OUR TECH WAS IN THE HOME.THERE IS NO REPAIR.THERE IS A RECOURSE WITH *** *** HOME SERVICESWARRANTYIF THIS HAPPENS AGAIN WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME,THE CUSTOMER CAN REPORT IT TO THE WARRANT'Y COMPANY AND WECAN COME BACK OUT AGAIN AND HOPEFULLY THE BURNER ISMALFUNCTIONING AT THAT TIMEOR THE CUSTOMER CAN REQUEST ASECOND OPINION FROM ANOTHER SERVICING COMPANY.WE REALLY DON'T GO OVER THE CUSTOMER'S AGREEMENT WITH THEM.THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE THAT A SERVICE FEE OF UP TO $100.00WOULD BE DUEWE ATTEMPTED TO COLLECT THE MINIMUM OF $65.00PLUS $TAX TOTALLING $THE HOMEOWNER ORDERED OURTECHNICIAN OUT OF THEIR HOME.WE WILL BE BILLING THEM $FOR THE CALL TO THE HOME.SINCERELY,*** ***VICE PRESIDENT
I am accepting this resolution and am paying the bill because
it’s clear that Carris Appliance Repair is more concerned with a comparatively
insignificant sum than with providing even cursory satisfactory customer
service. Carris has shown a lack of ethics
and integrity throughout, and I will exercise my rights as a consumer to make
my experiences with Carris known throughout my professional associations and through
the review platforms available on-line.
Further, I feel that Carris’ practice of not stating that a minimum
service fee applies at the time of scheduling – a practice that Carris refuses
to amend – and then not attempting to diagnose or repair constitutes fraud I
will be reporting this case immediately to the Ohio Attorney General
Office.
Again, I am remitting today the sum of $69.88 to Carris
Appliance. In return for this fee Carris
sent a rude technician to my home who was uninterested in diagnosing, much less
fixing the issue for which he was called; was dismissive and insulting to my wife;
failed to provide even a high-level inspection of the appliance in order to diagnose the problem for
which he was called (he did not even turn the appliance on); was on-site for
less than ten minutes; became even more rude and unprofessional when questioned
about the fee (to the point where he was asked to leave our home).
I hope that the Revdex.com will review its
association with Carris Appliance Repair.
I would be interested to know how many service calls result in ‘no
repair’ or the technician being ‘unable to duplicate the malfunction’. Integrity and Ethics are all the prevent
companies such as this from charging unpublished minimum fees when services are
not even attempted. It’s clear that
Carris has neither ethics nor integrity.
There was no service rendered. Per the home owner's warranty, the customer is responsible for the first $100 of repairs. There were no repairs. This is not an issue of a tech being unable to complete repairs, having to order a part a part and return, etc. This is a case in which the tech did not attempt to diagnose the problem, research the issue, or inspect the cooktop. This is simple consumer protection. If this company does not inform customers of a minimum fee and are under no obligation to even attempt a repair (as no repair was attempted in this case), what prevents a tech from simply informing a customer that they are unable to correct the problem, collecting the fee, and moving on to the next appointment, and doing the same thing? If the company states at the time of scheduling that this fee is applied whether services are rendered or not, then it allows the customer to make an informed decision. If "THERE WAS NO REPAIR", I would like for Ms. [redacted] to state what I - the consumer - receive in exchange for the $69.88 fee. Clearly her company was aware that the issue occured for a finite amount of time in that she states "ONLY AFTER THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE RANGE. IT MAY RE DUE T0 THE BURNER BEING SPRAYED WITH CLEANER WHICH WOULD HAVE CAUSED THE BURNER TO CLICK UNTIL IT DRIED FROM THE CLEANER." Thus, company understood (or the tech should have known) that the issue the was intermittent. Further, the tech did not attempt to re-create the issue. In fact, he was quite rude and dismissive of my wife during the entire discussion. These are not 'services' I feel obligated to pay for. The business repsonse makes it clear that this company has a policy to collect a minumum fee ($65) regardless of if services are even attempted. Customers should be advised of this fee at the time of scheduling. Lastly, to the business point with respect to 'not being surprised' that a fee was due: I was indeed surprised. In that this was the first time a 'service' rep attempted to collect a fee for not even attempting a repair and being on site for less than ten minutes. If the fee is not waived and the policy amended I will report this issue to the Ohio Attorney General's Consumer Complaint office.
SINCE YOU DO NOT WANT TO PAY THE $69.88 FEE PLEASE REFER THE [redacted] HOME SERVICE COMPANY 800-327-9787 SELECT 0 AND REQUEST CUSTOMER SERVICE. LET THEM KNOW YOUR COMPLAINT AND WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR DECISION. YOU DO HAVE RECOURSE THROUGH YOUR CONTRACT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY SAY WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TRIED TO COLLECT THE SERVICE FEE THEN WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR RULING.OUR TECHNICIAN WAS NOT INFORMED THAT THE PROBLEM WITH THE COOKTOP WAS AN INTERMITTANT PROBLEM--IT ONLY HAPPENED WHEN THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE BURNER--UNTIL HE WAS IN THE HOME. IF WE GO TO ANY HOME AND ARE NOTIFIED AT THAT TIME THAT A PROBLEM WITH AN APPLIANCE ONLY HAPPENS SOMETIMES, IF THE PROBLEM DOESN'T HAPPEN WHEN THE TECHNICIAN IS THERE, WE CAN'T DO A REPAIR. WE CAN'T GUESS WHICH PART WAS MALFUNCTIONING. WE ARE WILLING TO COME OUT ON A CALL TO REPAIR AN APPLIANCE. BUT IF IT IS WORKING PROPERLY AT THE TIME OF SERVICE, WE DO COLLECT OUR MINIMUM. THERE IS A 30 DAY WARRANTY ON THIS SITUATION AND IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN, WE WILL GO OUT INTENDING TO REPAIR THE APPLIANCE. WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER INTERMITTANT MALFUNCTIONS.IF A CUSTOMER CALLS IN TO REQUEST APPLIANCE REPAIR AND THEY SAY, "IT ONLY HAPPENS SOMETIMES" I WILL USUALLY SAY, "HOPEFULLY THE APPLIANCE WILL MALFUNCTION WHEN THE TECHNICIAN IS THERE. OTHERWISE, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO A REPAIR."AGAIN, PLEASE DISCUSS THIS WITH YOUR CONTRACT COMPANY. WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR DECISION.YOURS TRULY[redacted]PRESIDENT
WE RECEIVED YOUR NOTICE REGARDING THE SERVICE CALL AT MR***'S HOME ON SATURDAY, MARCH 21, THlS SERVICEREQUEST WAS A RESULT OF A CLAIM ON THE HOMEOWNER'S WARRANTYAGREEMENT WITH *** *** HOME SERVICESTHE HOMEOWNERWAS AWARE OF A $DEDUCTIBLE ON THIS CLAIMHE SHOULD NOTHAVE BEEN
SURPRISED THAT A SERVICE FEE WOULD BE DUE.THE TECHNICIAN WAS TOLD THAT THE CLICKING PROBLEM HAPPENEDONLY AFTER THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE RANGEIT MAY RE DUE T0THE BURNER BEING SPRAYED WITH CLEANER WHICH WOULD HAVECAUSED THE BURNER TO CLICK UNTIL IT DRIED FROM THE CLEANERTHEPROBLEM DID NOT HAPPEN WHEN OUR TECHNICIAN WAS IN THE HOMEIFTHE RANGE DID NOT MALFUNCTION WHEN OUR TECH WAS IN THE HOME.THERE IS NO REPAIR.THERE IS A RECOURSE WITH *** *** HOME SERVICESWARRANTYIF THIS HAPPENS AGAIN WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME,THE CUSTOMER CAN REPORT IT TO THE WARRANT'Y COMPANY AND WECAN COME BACK OUT AGAIN AND HOPEFULLY THE BURNER ISMALFUNCTIONING AT THAT TIMEOR THE CUSTOMER CAN REQUEST ASECOND OPINION FROM ANOTHER SERVICING COMPANY.WE REALLY DON'T GO OVER THE CUSTOMER'S AGREEMENT WITH THEM.THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE THAT A SERVICE FEE OF UP TO $100.00WOULD BE DUEWE ATTEMPTED TO COLLECT THE MINIMUM OF $65.00PLUS $TAX TOTALLING $THE HOMEOWNER ORDERED OURTECHNICIAN OUT OF THEIR HOME.WE WILL BE BILLING THEM $FOR THE CALL TO THE HOME.SINCERELY,*** ***VICE PRESIDENT
I am accepting this resolution and am paying the bill because
it’s clear that Carris Appliance Repair is more concerned with a comparatively
insignificant sum than with providing even cursory satisfactory customer
service. Carris has shown a lack of ethics
and integrity throughout, and I will exercise my rights as a consumer to make
my experiences with Carris known throughout my professional associations and through
the review platforms available on-line.
Further, I feel that Carris’ practice of not stating that a minimum
service fee applies at the time of scheduling – a practice that Carris refuses
to amend – and then not attempting to diagnose or repair constitutes fraud I
will be reporting this case immediately to the Ohio Attorney General
Office.
Again, I am remitting today the sum of $69.88 to Carris
Appliance. In return for this fee Carris
sent a rude technician to my home who was uninterested in diagnosing, much less
fixing the issue for which he was called; was dismissive and insulting to my wife;
failed to provide even a high-level inspection of the appliance in order to diagnose the problem for
which he was called (he did not even turn the appliance on); was on-site for
less than ten minutes; became even more rude and unprofessional when questioned
about the fee (to the point where he was asked to leave our home).
I hope that the Revdex.com will review its
association with Carris Appliance Repair.
I would be interested to know how many service calls result in ‘no
repair’ or the technician being ‘unable to duplicate the malfunction’. Integrity and Ethics are all the prevent
companies such as this from charging unpublished minimum fees when services are
not even attempted. It’s clear that
Carris has neither ethics nor integrity.
There was no service rendered. Per the home owner's warranty, the customer is responsible for the first $100 of repairs. There were no repairs. This is not an issue of a tech being unable to complete repairs, having to order a part a part and return, etc. This is a case in which the tech did not attempt to diagnose the problem, research the issue, or inspect the cooktop. This is simple consumer protection. If this company does not inform customers of a minimum fee and are under no obligation to even attempt a repair (as no repair was attempted in this case), what prevents a tech from simply informing a customer that they are unable to correct the problem, collecting the fee, and moving on to the next appointment, and doing the same thing? If the company states at the time of scheduling that this fee is applied whether services are rendered or not, then it allows the customer to make an informed decision. If "THERE WAS NO REPAIR", I would like for Ms. [redacted] to state what I - the consumer - receive in exchange for the $69.88 fee. Clearly her company was aware that the issue occured for a finite amount of time in that she states "ONLY AFTER THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE RANGE. IT MAY RE DUE T0 THE BURNER BEING SPRAYED WITH CLEANER WHICH WOULD HAVE CAUSED THE BURNER TO CLICK UNTIL IT DRIED FROM THE CLEANER." Thus, company understood (or the tech should have known) that the issue the was intermittent. Further, the tech did not attempt to re-create the issue. In fact, he was quite rude and dismissive of my wife during the entire discussion. These are not 'services' I feel obligated to pay for. The business repsonse makes it clear that this company has a policy to collect a minumum fee ($65) regardless of if services are even attempted. Customers should be advised of this fee at the time of scheduling. Lastly, to the business point with respect to 'not being surprised' that a fee was due: I was indeed surprised. In that this was the first time a 'service' rep attempted to collect a fee for not even attempting a repair and being on site for less than ten minutes. If the fee is not waived and the policy amended I will report this issue to the Ohio Attorney General's Consumer Complaint office.
SINCE YOU DO NOT WANT TO PAY THE $69.88 FEE PLEASE REFER THE [redacted] HOME SERVICE COMPANY 800-327-9787 SELECT 0 AND REQUEST CUSTOMER SERVICE. LET THEM KNOW YOUR COMPLAINT AND WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR DECISION. YOU DO HAVE RECOURSE THROUGH YOUR CONTRACT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY SAY WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TRIED TO COLLECT THE SERVICE FEE THEN WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR RULING.OUR TECHNICIAN WAS NOT INFORMED THAT THE PROBLEM WITH THE COOKTOP WAS AN INTERMITTANT PROBLEM--IT ONLY HAPPENED WHEN THE HOUSEKEEPER CLEANED THE BURNER--UNTIL HE WAS IN THE HOME. IF WE GO TO ANY HOME AND ARE NOTIFIED AT THAT TIME THAT A PROBLEM WITH AN APPLIANCE ONLY HAPPENS SOMETIMES, IF THE PROBLEM DOESN'T HAPPEN WHEN THE TECHNICIAN IS THERE, WE CAN'T DO A REPAIR. WE CAN'T GUESS WHICH PART WAS MALFUNCTIONING. WE ARE WILLING TO COME OUT ON A CALL TO REPAIR AN APPLIANCE. BUT IF IT IS WORKING PROPERLY AT THE TIME OF SERVICE, WE DO COLLECT OUR MINIMUM. THERE IS A 30 DAY WARRANTY ON THIS SITUATION AND IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN, WE WILL GO OUT INTENDING TO REPAIR THE APPLIANCE. WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER INTERMITTANT MALFUNCTIONS.IF A CUSTOMER CALLS IN TO REQUEST APPLIANCE REPAIR AND THEY SAY, "IT ONLY HAPPENS SOMETIMES" I WILL USUALLY SAY, "HOPEFULLY THE APPLIANCE WILL MALFUNCTION WHEN THE TECHNICIAN IS THERE. OTHERWISE, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO A REPAIR."AGAIN, PLEASE DISCUSS THIS WITH YOUR CONTRACT COMPANY. WE WILL ABIDE BY THEIR DECISION.YOURS TRULY[redacted]PRESIDENT