Commonwealth Cooling & Heating

Review: On Thursday, 1/9/14, my wife contacted the contractor (Commonwealth) to arrange for a home inspection related to a recent carbon monoxide alarm activation in our home. Earlier on the morning of 1/9/14, we had an alarm activation and response through our security provider ADT, who in turn dispatched the [redacted] County Fire Department to our home. Upon inspection of the home the fire department noted that carbon monoxide levels were slightly elevated. They indicated that there was no reason for immediate concern and recommended that my wife contact an HVAC contractor to further inspect our home appliances to determine if there was a carbon monoxide leak or if the problem was a faulty carbon monoxide detector. I was on a business trip and was unable to visually inspect the detector or discuss the details with the fire department. The technician arrived later on 1/9/14 in response to my wife's call to Commonwealth that morning.

My wife reached me by phone while in meetings and asked if I could speak to the technician regarding his findings. He and I spoke quickly and he told me the following.

• He indicated that there was a carbon monoxide leak and upon inspection of the furnace there were readings of 412 PPM which were well above the normal limits.

• He determined that the heat exchanger was cracked and that the unit needed to be replaced.

• He provided me with 2 options for replacement of the current [redacted] unit with [redacted] units.

I asked if there were any other options and if I could wait to make the repair since the fire department had not reported high levels of carbon monoxide. He indicated that he was required by federal law to shut down the furnace given the PPM reading and that my family would be without heat. Given this information, the extreme cold that our area was experiencing and my inability to be on-site, I authorized the installation of a new furnace.

When I returned home on Saturday, 1/11/14, I reviewed the Commonwealth service invoice that my wife had signed in my absence and the new furnace. On Sunday 1/12/12, the carbon monoxide alarm once again triggered, similar to the alarm event on 1/9/14. The fire department was again dispatched to our home and they conducted a thorough test for carbon monoxide in all areas of the home. During that effort, they attempted to turn on the furnace (in addition to all of the other gas appliances in the home. The furnace would not turn on despite how high we raised the thermostat. After a number of efforts, they noticed that the emergency gas cutoff near the furnace was in the off position. This of course meant that the furnace had never been turned back on by the Commonwealth installers (which I don't understand) and that the carbon monoxide detector alarm clearly had no relationship to the furnace. Their determination was that the carbon monoxide detector was likely faulty. We explained that a new furnace had been installed and summarized what Fred had told me based on Commonwealth's inspection. The fire department was not aware of any federal law requiring contractors to shut down a furnace based on a PPM reading and upon reviewing the service invoice provided by Commonwealth were unclear regarding the written diagnosis of "flue gases showing 412 PPM." They indicated that a 412 PPM reading for carbon monoxide was extremely high and that if that had been the case their original air readings on 1/9/14 would have been "off the charts." They also indicated that any reading above 20 PPM is concerning and if that had been the case we would have been advised to leave the premises. They asked if Commonwealth had inspected the other gas appliances in the home or had tested the air quality around the house. My wife indicated no, which is shocking to me and is very concerning given the situation. Why would your Commonwealth only look at the furnace without inspecting other gas appliances as the potential source? Why didn't anyone check/test the detector? W

Since my return, I have done some research and noted that my existing furnace had a 20 year warranty for the heat exchanger, which is typical of most residential furnaces. Did Commonwealth perform a visual inspection of the heat exchanger that supported the diagnosis of the crack and do you have visual evidence? What tools were used to diagnose the alleged crack? I'm also unclear regarding why Commonwealth would not have mentioned or recommended reviewing the existing heat exchange warranty as a potential option for addressing this issue prior to recommending the purchase of a new furnace as the only solution? I am very upset about how Commonwealth handled this matter and feel as though they preyed on our fear of the carbon monoxide risk and the extreme cold and duped us into purchasing a new furnace unit.

It is clear to me that Commonwealth was not thorough and negligent in its review of the situation in my home and incorrectly determined and advised that a new furnace was required to correct the situation. Even if a crack in the heat exchanger was identified and can be proven, Commonwealth was negligent by not considering or mentioning the potential warranty as a solution rather than pushing a new furnace purchase. Additionally, Commonwealth provided false information regarding the federal requirement to shut down the furnace in order to induce us into purchasing the new furnace. Also, prior to identifying the furnace as the source of the problem, Commonwealth did not thoroughly assess the situation by checking other gas appliances as the potential source of the problem and made no effort to verify if the carbon monoxide detector was working correctly.Desired Settlement: Willing to settle for reasonable costs of repair as opposed to replacement in the amount of $1,000. I have provided contractor with a reasonable offer and have not received any response.

Business

Response:

The first communcation that we received from the customer was a certified letter on January 16th, 2014 (postmarked January 14th - tracking number [redacted]). There was no phone call made by the customer stating that their heat was not working from the time of installation on January 10th to January 12th when the gas was allegedly turned off. We responded as per the customers request on January 17th, 2014 via certified mail (tracking number [redacted]). USPS left notification of the mail on January 18th. We had to initiate redelivery on January 31st from our end because the customer still had not picked up the mail. It is also important for us to note that we feel it is our responsibility to provide the best options, in our opinion, to our customers for any repairs or replacements. We do however feel that the customer has to take some responsibility for the repair/replacement options that they choose. They can do this by knowing their appliance warranty information and getting multiple estimates for major repairs.

Below is the response that was mailed to the customer.

Dear [redacted],