Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 10, 2014/08/05) */ Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2014/08/06) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I have already supplied/emailed CROSSCOM with a copy of the receipt which I am including here along with the letter from the attorneyPlease note that the amount owed is more than doubleBut the primary reason for my not accepting is clear from their receipt which clearly states that I do not owe them anything.So their response should state that I do not owe them upon further review of receiving the receiptThey should know that their payment issue is with the insurance company if any not me, as I signed over the check and never received a dime from the insurance claimNor has anyone contacted me to schedule a date for the technician to come out to repair said damage they caused or re-install meter right side up Business Response / [redacted] (4001, 21, 2014/10/03) */ see the attached scanned document NOTE FROM THE Revdex.com: Please provide an accounting of all payments made to the businessCopies of the cancelled checks (front & back) would prove helpful as well [redacted] Assistant Manager-Home Services Revdex.com-Chicago & Northern Illinois Consumer Response / [redacted] (3000, 25, 2014/10/06) */ 10/3/ I included a copy of my receipt which you can see was crossed out with an X and signed by their representativeWhich shows that I do not owe them a dimeYou can see what a shady company they are by the $plus disparity in the letter from the attorney and their response figure$3000.00-$I have the receipt and I stand by itThey are scammers, storm chasers! I do not make it a habit of going on the roof checking work of an alleged professional companyIn hindsight I should have, since they sent the Home Depot day labor crew out to do the job and not certified professionalsI was only made aware of the damage due to leaking and storm damage when a roofing contractor went on the roof and saw the damage they left/caused
Response from Crosscom, Inc: We apologize for the amount of time Ms [redacted] s' project took from start to completion, we understand there were mishapsHowever, we are pleased to be completed with the projectRegarding the cabinets, all wood accepts stains differently, if Ms [redacted] would allow, we would be happy to send a technician to attempt a more uniform look Thank you Lorena [redacted] Crosscom, Inc
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this is mostly truthful This company was aware that the gutters were not installed as I had my insurance company reach out to them in regard to the out of scope charge of $1300--the company moved forward with the job without our permission We agreed to pay $out of the $expense because the time and hassle of moving forward legally was not worth it The company did come out after plus months to finish the job and did negotiate to a $credit, so while it wasn't the best situation, we did come to a resolution The public adjuster also owns the company which does the work I would advise others to be leary of this in the future resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted]
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 10, 2014/08/05) */ Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2014/08/06) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I have already supplied/emailed CROSSCOM with a copy of the receipt which I am including here along with the letter from the attorneyPlease note that the amount owed is more than doubleBut the primary reason for my not accepting is clear from their receipt which clearly states that I do not owe them anything.So their response should state that I do not owe them upon further review of receiving the receiptThey should know that their payment issue is with the insurance company if any not me, as I signed over the check and never received a dime from the insurance claimNor has anyone contacted me to schedule a date for the technician to come out to repair said damage they caused or re-install meter right side up Business Response / [redacted] (4001, 21, 2014/10/03) */ see the attached scanned document NOTE FROM THE Revdex.com: Please provide an accounting of all payments made to the businessCopies of the cancelled checks (front & back) would prove helpful as well [redacted] Assistant Manager-Home Services Revdex.com-Chicago & Northern Illinois Consumer Response / [redacted] (3000, 25, 2014/10/06) */ 10/3/ I included a copy of my receipt which you can see was crossed out with an X and signed by their representativeWhich shows that I do not owe them a dimeYou can see what a shady company they are by the $plus disparity in the letter from the attorney and their response figure$3000.00-$I have the receipt and I stand by itThey are scammers, storm chasers! I do not make it a habit of going on the roof checking work of an alleged professional companyIn hindsight I should have, since they sent the Home Depot day labor crew out to do the job and not certified professionalsI was only made aware of the damage due to leaking and storm damage when a roofing contractor went on the roof and saw the damage they left/caused
Response from Crosscom, Inc: We apologize for the amount of time Ms [redacted] s' project took from start to completion, we understand there were mishapsHowever, we are pleased to be completed with the projectRegarding the cabinets, all wood accepts stains differently, if Ms [redacted] would allow, we would be happy to send a technician to attempt a more uniform look Thank you Lorena [redacted] Crosscom, Inc
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this is mostly truthful This company was aware that the gutters were not installed as I had my insurance company reach out to them in regard to the out of scope charge of $1300--the company moved forward with the job without our permission We agreed to pay $out of the $expense because the time and hassle of moving forward legally was not worth it The company did come out after plus months to finish the job and did negotiate to a $credit, so while it wasn't the best situation, we did come to a resolution The public adjuster also owns the company which does the work I would advise others to be leary of this in the future resolution is satisfactory to me Sincerely, [redacted]