D C G Construction

This response is regarding the inquiry for Mr [redacted] ***.Mr [redacted] would like our company to pay for damages that was the result of a worn brass hose fittingthat he purchased years ago (6/4/1994)This fitting was not leaking when our service person was atthe home earlier, but started leaking sometime afterwards.Upon Mr***'s call to our office, we cancelled our other scheduled work and immediately sent ourgeneral manager and another service tech to the location with a shop vacs to help clean up the mess.Our employees spent hours at the location.Mr [redacted] called our office and spoke to our secretary to compliment both Harryand Storm on the workthey did on helping with the clean up.Sometime later, a representative of Mr***'s homeowners insurance called and inquired about thecause of the incidentIt was explained that the leaking fitting was the property of the homeowner and itwas over years oldI told him would gladly give them our insurance provider information, but heagreed that it would be fruitless, since it was beyond the warranty of year on parts and fittingsregarding plumbing installations.Mr [redacted] then called and inquired why it was his insurance that was covering the cost of damages andwhy our liability policy was notMr [redacted] was not happy with the fact that our insurance companywould deny liability regarding this incidentI then tried to make an apples to apples comparison of ascenario that if [redacted] installed a hot water heater years ago would he think [redacted] would beresponsible for a leaking plumbing fitting from so long ago? There was no voice raising as Mr***wrote in his letter, but he did not want to hear the logic of the situation.Mr [redacted] was a happy Culligan Customer for yearsWe regret his decision to go with anothervendor, but we do not have control to require our Insurance provider to issue monies they are notobligated to provideThe fact that Mr***'s homeowners carrier decided against subrogation clearlysuggests that there was not liability on our part.Sincerely; [redacted] ***Dealer

This response is regarding the inquiry for Mr. [redacted].Mr. [redacted] would like our company to pay for damages that was the result of a worn brass hose fittingthat he purchased 22 years ago (6/4/1994). This fitting was not leaking when our service person was atthe home earlier, but started leaking...

sometime afterwards.Upon Mr. [redacted]'s call to our office, we cancelled our other scheduled work and immediately sent ourgeneral manager and another service tech to the location with a shop vacs to help clean up the mess.Our employees spent 5 hours at the location.Mr. [redacted] called our office and spoke to our secretary to compliment both Harryand Storm on the workthey did on helping with the clean up.Sometime later, a representative of Mr. [redacted]'s homeowners insurance called and inquired about thecause of the incident. It was explained that the leaking fitting was the property of the homeowner and itwas over 22 years old. I told him would gladly give them our insurance provider information, but heagreed that it would be fruitless, since it was beyond the warranty of 1 year on parts and fittingsregarding plumbing installations.Mr. [redacted] then called and inquired why it was his insurance that was covering the cost of damages andwhy our liability policy was not. Mr. [redacted] was not happy with the fact that our insurance companywould deny liability regarding this incident. I then tried to make an apples to apples comparison of ascenario that if [redacted] installed a hot water heater 22 years ago would he think [redacted] would beresponsible for a leaking plumbing fitting from so long ago? There was no voice raising as Mr. [redacted]wrote in his letter, but he did not want to hear the logic of the situation.Mr. [redacted] was a happy Culligan Customer for 22 years. We regret his decision to go with anothervendor, but we do not have control to require our Insurance provider to issue monies they are notobligated to provide. The fact that Mr. [redacted]'s homeowners carrier decided against subrogation clearlysuggests that there was not liability on our part.Sincerely;[redacted]Dealer