Comprehensive Mold Management, LLC

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] We are requesting a refund for services not providedWe do not want to proceed with another test with this company based on the way they operate and failure of the theft of money from services, it is at the very least un-ethicalI offered to pay $for there minutes of time, which I feel is more than fair and could of avoided all of thisAll they did was to tell us new things we needed to do that they did not tell us we needed to do beforeIt is a very deceptive business practiceWe also signed nothing that says that we will be charged the full amount of the test if it is not performed If we do not receive the $ASAP we will be forced to escalate this to the department of state and leave appropriate reviews Revdex.com spoke with the business who advised that this consumer cares for the property for out of town landlord Business was contacted over a year ago, an inspection was completed with the consumer being told what need to be corrected for the property to pass inspection Business was called back at a later time and the property failed miserablyBusiness called back for another follow up on the property however an employee of the consumer asked the business to please walk through and advised of anything that needed to be done prior to conducting another inspection This was done, the employees had not correctly repaired the home and were advised of suchBusiness told the employee to correct the issues noted and he would come back for another inspection at no additional cost A period of time later consumer called back asking for full refund, business advised he has already been out and done work therefore consumer is not entitled to a full refundThe business further advised the consumer he can call for another inspection once the work is done without occurring additional cost, consumer declined and demanded a full refundAt this time the offer for re-inspection stands Regards, [redacted]

Dear [redacted]As per your request, we are responding to [redacted]'s filed second complaint: (responses in red)Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]We are requesting a refund for services not provided. We do not want to proceed with another test with this company based on the way they operate and failure of the theft of money from services, it is at the very least un-ethical. I offered to pay $150 for there 15 minutes of time, which I feel is more than fair and could of avoided all of this. All they did was to tell us new things we needed to do that they did not tell us we needed to do before. It is a very deceptive business practice. We also signed nothing that says that we will be charged the full amount of the test if it is not performed.  If we do not receive the $417 ASAP we will be forced to escalate this to the department of state and leave appropriate reviews. [redacted] has offered to refund the cost of testing of $150.00. [redacted] and his assistant, [redacted], came out to the address for the inspection and completed a walk-through. The representative from [redacted] Properties specifically asked that before any testing was completed, could we let him know if there was still work to be done. [redacted] walked through the property and told them that the property would fail and submitted a report to [redacted] stating what work remained to be completed in order for it to pass testing. We did not complete any air testing b/c [redacted] was told by the representative from [redacted] Properites that if the tests would fail, that he did not want [redacted] to run them b/c they would like to rectify what needed to be done first. They also did not want to pay for [redacted] to come out to the property again. The fee that we are not willing to refund was for the inspection, which was completed by [redacted] and also for the report that was sent to Mr. [redacted] (which took a good deal of time to write up for him) . Again, we are more than willing to refund him for the $150.00 for the air testing fee.   Please see all attached documents for clarification, if needed. (Invoice, signed waiver and the inspection report that [redacted] sent to [redacted].)

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
We are requesting a refund for services not provided. We do not want to proceed with another test with this company based on the way they operate and failure of the theft of money from services, it is at the very least un-ethical. I offered to pay $150 for there 15 minutes of time, which I feel is more than fair and could of avoided all of this. All they did was to tell us new things we needed to do that they did not tell us we needed to do before. It is a very deceptive business practice. We also signed nothing that says that we will be charged the full amount of the test if it is not performed.  If we do not receive the $417 ASAP we will be forced to escalate this to the department of state and leave appropriate reviews.
 
 
Revdex.com spoke with the business who advised that this consumer cares for the property for out of town landlord.  Business was contacted over a year ago, an inspection was completed with the consumer being told what need to be corrected for the property to pass inspection.  Business was called back at a later time and the property failed miserably. Business called back for another follow up on the property however an employee of the consumer asked the business to please walk through and advised of anything that needed to be done prior to conducting another inspection.  This was done, the employees had not correctly repaired the home and were advised of such. Business told the employee to correct the issues noted and he would come back for another inspection at no additional cost.  A period of time later consumer called back asking for full refund, business advised he has already been out and done work therefore consumer is not entitled to a full refund. The business further advised the consumer he can call for another inspection once the work is done without occurring additional cost, consumer declined and demanded a full refund. At this time the offer for re-inspection stands. 
Regards,[redacted]

Revdex.com spoke with the business who advised that this consumer cares for the property for out of town landlord.  Business was contacted over a year ago, an inspection was completed with the consumer being told what need to be corrected for the property to pass inspection.  Business was called...

back at a later time and the property failed miserably. Business called back for another follow up on the property however an employee of the consumer asked the business to please walk through and advised of anything that needed to be done prior to conducting another inspection.  This was done, the employees had not correctly repaired the home and were advised of such. Business told the employee to correct the issues noted and he would come back for another inspection at no additional cost.  A period of time later consumer called back asking for full refund, business advised he has already been out and done work therefore consumer is not entitled to a full refund. The business further advised the consumer he can call for another inspection once the work is done without occurring additional cost, consumer declined and demanded a full refund. At this time the offer for re-inspection stands.