Done Right Air Conditioning

In this instance, as you pointed out, the Revdex.com & this process is not proving or enforcing anything, nor are we attempting to obtain & create any type of binding specific decision of that of a court or arbitrator Therefore, especially in this instance, the relevancy of the disagreement of the actual numbers are not important, just the nature of the complaint I'm travelling overseas & don't have access to specific payment records (the only relevant issue from their response that I would actually have access to, with the exception of the maintenance contract, which I believe was just provided by the business in their response attachments), however, I will specifically respond to the numbers referenced in their response & add these clarifications to my last response: The business is correct that the year "annual" service that was paid for & to be delivered was done so semi-annually, not quarterly, however, that doesn't change the fact that it has been paid in full to date by the Consumer & that the service wasn't performed and/or performed correctly; Furthermore, the frequency of the service that was supposedly performed is irrelevant in these discussions & doesn't alter the other more important relevant facts of the contractual breach by the company to perform, the failure to detect their original diagnostic error during each of the supposed service calls that they supposedly performed & to fully fulfill the terms of their contract; The disagreement of the specific numbers (total paid to date & relevancy of reimbursement by the builder to myself) is wholly irrelevant in the context of these discussions, as it doesn't alter the following facts: a) Businesses professional industry obligation to not error in their inspection, diagnosis & repair; b) To fulfill their contractual & professional obligation of specific performance under the maintenance contracts; c) It appears to me that the business has already provided you the necessary & important documentation within the context of these discussions, the proof of the validity (existence) of the maintenance contract; The business already acknowledges & states that in their calculations, I've already paid more than what I owed to date & more than what I believe to be the case & had stated in my original complaint Consequently, the discrepancy in the amount paid toward the service contract is a moot point & supports my position that the business is contractually for specific performance & complete all maintenance visits; The 'proof' of documentation to support or deny the lack of service performed by the business, is not mine to offer, only the business would have such proof as I have already stated I was not present when such service visits occurred & the business did not have me sign anything stating, agreeing to or verifying that they actually performed said service & I therefore would inherently not be in a position to provide such proof; In other words, I have no direct knowledge that they actually last service call in which they properly diagnosed the problem (of which my tenant was there this time & disputes whether or not they actually did the service or just diagnosed the problem); In summary, there is no other documentation that I can provide at this time If, in fact, the business continues to refuse to complete the necessary repair, in the future I will complete the repair & will be able to supporting documentation at that time Finally, once home in early January I will be able to provide you documentation supporting the replacement of personal property items, along with photos of the actual property damage to the bed & bedding as a result of the water leakageSincerely, *** [redacted]

Response to Complaint # [redacted] 11/28/14History of this issue: On 9/12/our Company received an email from Mr [redacted] (hereinafter known as Customer) in part of which he started “ I called [redacted] & their designated A/C companies out twice during the first year ” When our Company was first contacted he was having his “ poor performance & leaking ” issue for the 3rd timeOur Company found a Freon leak which required replacing one air handler’s evaporator coilBecause the problem had occurred times, it is most probable that during the previous warranty visits by the builder’s A/C contractor they had just added Freon – which temporarily solved the problem, but it continued to leak outAfter our Company replaced the leaking coil, there were no more issues for over yearsThis indicates that our Company actually did diagnose and correctly repair the A/C systemNext, the amount of the charge was $(not $or $as he has stated)This was billed to and paid by Customer, who then filed a claim with his condominium’s developerSubsequently, the Customer received $(50% of the invoice amount) as a settlement & reimbursement from his condominium’s developer, for which the Customer signed a receipt (see attached)This initial issue had nothing to do with the second problem which arose over years later and is described belowLast Service and Diagnostic Report/Recommended Repair: On 10/22/14, our Company received a call that water was leaking from one of the AC systems and “could we go out and diagnose/fix the problem as soon as possible”? As requested, we went the following day (10/23/14)Rather than charge the customer as additional diagnostic fee and repair charge, it was agreed between both parties (thru the Customer’s wife – our contact person) that the 5th of prepaid Precision Tune-Ups would be moved up a month and performed on this same service call during which we would take care of the problem causing the water leakThe Customer’s wife was very grateful for this and thanked usThe PTUs were performed and in addition there was the need for intensive cleaning of one of the drain lines, which required disassembly, additional cleaning, and reassembly of the equipmentThis clog was due to improper slope of the drain line at the original installation of the new systemThe additional cleaning performed was outside the scope of a routine PTU but the customer was not billed any additional chargeOur technician relayed to the office, which subsequently advised the Customer’s wife (via email on 10-29-14), that the equipment was installed in such a way that the drain line couldn’t drain properlyIt was recommended that modifications be done to correct this problem and prevent any future water leaksThe cost for this work was quoted at a discounted rate of $Customer History: Customer states that he contracted for quarterly preventative maintenance serviceThat is incorrectOn 9-17-12, Customer enrolled in a 3-year semi-annual Energy Savings Agreement (ESA) program for a discounted rate of $1,to provide a total of Precision Tune-Ups (PTUs) on Customer’s air conditioning equipmentThe Customer was allowed to pay the discounted amount of $1,in payments of $38.25/month with no finance charge over the three year periodOf the six semi-annual Precision Tune-Ups for which the Customer contracted, he has received fiveTo date, Customer has paid $1,in monthly installments (not $918.00) towards the $1,ESA contractThere is a $balance due on his accountThis amount is more than the value ($229.50) of the one service he has remainingIn lieu of performing any further service for the Customer, our company is choosing to zero out this account balanceHe has received a gift of $ Customer’s WrongConclusion/Decision to Terminate Business Relationship: Based on our current findings and recommendations, the Customer then emailed our Company and incorrectly assumed that this last service issue had the same cause as the first problem over two years prior, and he erroneously stated that our 1st diagnosis and repair was improperHis position was that we should do the recommended repair at no additional charge to himWe could not make him see that one problem was due to a Freon Leak and the other was due to a Water LeakOnce the Customer started to accuse our company of poor service and a wrongful diagnosis, and then threaten our company with filing a complaint with an outside agency and multiple websites on the internet, it was our position to release the Customer from any further financial obligation, to refuse servicing of his equipment, and to cease communication with him immediatelyOur Company’s The Customer has exhibited numerous errors and omissions, which make the rest of his claims suspect Customer does not know the correct period of his contract, does not know the amount of the bill he paid and wants refunded, and neglected to mention the fact that he was already reimbursed ½ of that billHe certainly doesn’t know the nature of repairs that were made to his condo A/C systemHe has launched this complaint solely out of spite because we wouldn’t give in and give him everything he wanted for freeThere is no validity to his complaint whatsoeverCompany’s ConditionalWillingness not to file a Counter Claim: Our Company will not file a counter claim, provided Customer withdraws his complaint with the Revdex.com immediatelyOtherwise, we will consider any posting of a complaint facilitated by the Revdex.com libelous and a defamation of our Company’s characterNote – that includes leaving the complaint on the Revdex.com website but marking it “Resolved”If that happens, we will seek legal redress against the Customer AND the Revdex.com, to recover damages to our Company that are incurred as a result of this frivolous and irresponsible complaintRespectfully Submitted, [redacted] , President

In this instance, as you pointed out, the Revdex.com & this process is not proving or enforcing anything, nor are we attempting to obtain & create any type of binding specific decision of that of a court or arbitrator.  Therefore, especially in this instance, the relevancy of the disagreement of the actual numbers are not important, just the nature of the complaint.  I'm travelling overseas & don't have access to specific payment records (the only relevant issue from their response that I would actually have access to, with the exception of the maintenance contract, which I believe was just provided by the business in their response attachments), however, I will specifically respond to the numbers referenced in their response & add these clarifications to my last response:
1.  The business is correct that the 3 year "annual" service that was paid for & to be delivered was done so semi-annually, not quarterly, however, that doesn't change the fact that it has been paid in full to date by the Consumer & that the service wasn't performed and/or performed correctly;  Furthermore, the frequency of the service that was supposedly performed is irrelevant in these discussions & doesn't alter the other more important relevant facts of the contractual breach by the company to perform, the failure to detect their original diagnostic error during each of the supposed 5 service calls that they supposedly performed & to fully fulfill the terms of their contract;
2.  The disagreement of the specific numbers (total paid to date & relevancy of reimbursement by the builder to myself) is wholly irrelevant in the context of these discussions, as it doesn't alter the following facts:  a)  Businesses professional industry obligation to not error in their inspection, diagnosis & repair;  b)  To fulfill their contractual & professional obligation of specific performance under the maintenance contracts;  c)  
3.  It appears to me that the business has already provided you the necessary & important documentation within the context of these discussions, the proof of the validity (existence) of the maintenance contract; 
4.  The business already acknowledges & states that in their calculations, I've already paid more than what I owed to date & more than what I believe to be the case & had stated in my original complaint.  Consequently, the discrepancy in the amount paid toward the service contract is a moot point & supports my position that the business is contractually for specific performance & complete all 6 maintenance visits;
5.  The 'proof' of documentation to support or deny the lack of service performed by the business, is not mine to offer, only the business would have such proof as I have already stated I was not present when such service visits occurred & the business did not have me sign anything stating, agreeing to or verifying that they actually performed said service & I therefore would inherently not be in a position to provide such proof;  In other words, I have no direct knowledge that they actually  last service call in which they properly diagnosed the problem (of which my tenant was there this time & disputes whether or not they actually did the service or just diagnosed the problem);
In summary, there is no other documentation that I can provide at this time.  If, in fact, the business continues to refuse to complete the necessary repair, in the future I will complete the repair & will be able to supporting documentation at that time.  Finally, once home in early January I will be able to provide you documentation supporting the replacement of personal property items, along with photos of the actual property damage to the bed & bedding as a result of the water leakage.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Response to Complaint #[redacted]                                                                     ...

    11/28/14History of this issue:  On 9/12/12 our Company received an email from Mr. [redacted] (hereinafter known as Customer) in part of which he started “…I called [redacted] & their designated A/C companies out twice during the first year…” When our Company was first contacted he was having his “…poor performance & leaking…” issue for the 3rd time. Our Company found a Freon leak which required replacing one air handler’s evaporator coil. Because the problem had occurred 3 times, it is most probable that during the previous 2 warranty visits by the builder’s A/C contractor they had just added Freon – which temporarily solved the problem, but it continued to leak out. After our Company replaced the leaking coil, there were no more issues for over 2 years. This indicates that our Company actually did diagnose and correctly repair the A/C system. Next, the amount of the charge was $694.07 (not $800.00 or $816.00 as he has stated). This was billed to and paid by Customer, who then filed a claim with his condominium’s developer. Subsequently, the Customer received $347.04 (50% of the invoice amount) as a settlement & reimbursement from his condominium’s developer, for which the Customer signed a receipt (see attached). This initial issue had nothing to do with the second problem which arose over 2 years later and is described below.
Last Service and Diagnostic Report/Recommended Repair: On 10/22/14, our Company received a call that water was leaking from one of the AC systems and “could we go out and diagnose/fix the problem as soon as possible”? As requested, we went the following day (10/23/14). Rather than charge the customer as additional diagnostic fee and repair charge, it was agreed between both parties (thru the Customer’s wife – our contact person) that the 5th of 6 prepaid Precision Tune-Ups would be moved up a month and performed on this same service call during which we would take care of the problem causing the water leak. The Customer’s wife was very grateful for this and thanked us. The PTUs were performed and in addition there was the need for intensive cleaning of one of the drain lines, which required disassembly, additional cleaning, and reassembly of the equipment. This clog was due to improper slope of the drain line at the original installation of the new system. The additional cleaning performed was outside the scope of a routine PTU but the customer was not billed any additional charge. Our technician relayed to the office, which subsequently advised the Customer’s wife (via email on 10-29-14), that the equipment was installed in such a way that the drain line couldn’t drain properly. It was recommended that modifications be done to correct this problem and prevent any future water leaks. The cost for this work was quoted at a discounted rate of $307.78.
Customer History: Customer states that he contracted for quarterly preventative maintenance service. That is incorrect. On 9-17-12, Customer enrolled in a 3-year semi-annual Energy Savings Agreement (ESA) program for a discounted rate of $1,377.00 to provide a total of 6 Precision Tune-Ups (PTUs) on Customer’s air conditioning equipment. The Customer was allowed to pay the discounted amount of $1,377.00 in 36 payments of $38.25/month with no finance charge over the three year period. Of the six semi-annual Precision Tune-Ups for which the Customer contracted, he has received five. To date, Customer has paid $1,032.75 in monthly installments (not $918.00) towards the $1,377.00 ESA contract. There is a $344.25 balance due on his account. This amount is more than the value ($229.50) of the one service he has remaining. In lieu of performing any further service for the Customer, our company is choosing to zero out this account balance. He has received a gift of $114.75.  
Customer’s WrongConclusion/Decision to Terminate Business Relationship: Based on our current findings and recommendations, the Customer then emailed our Company and incorrectly assumed that this last service issue had the same cause as the first problem over two years prior, and he erroneously stated that our 1st diagnosis and repair was improper. His position was that we should do the recommended repair at no additional charge to him. We could not make him see that one problem was due to a Freon Leak and the other was due to a Water Leak. Once the Customer started to accuse our company of poor service and a wrongful diagnosis, and then threaten our company with filing a complaint with an outside agency and multiple websites on the internet, it was our position to release the Customer from any further financial obligation, to refuse servicing of his equipment, and to cease communication with him immediately.
Our Company’s Position: The Customer has exhibited numerous errors and omissions, which make the rest of his claims suspect.  Customer does not know the correct period of his contract, does not know the amount of the bill he paid and wants refunded, and neglected to mention the fact that he was already reimbursed ½ of that bill. He certainly doesn’t know the nature of repairs that were made to his condo A/C system. He has launched this complaint solely out of spite because we wouldn’t give in and give him everything he wanted for free. There is no validity to his complaint whatsoever.
Company’s ConditionalWillingness not to file a Counter Claim: Our Company will not file a counter claim, provided Customer withdraws his complaint with the Revdex.com immediately. Otherwise, we will consider any posting of a complaint facilitated by the Revdex.com libelous and a defamation of our Company’s character. Note – that includes leaving the complaint on the Revdex.com website but marking it “Resolved”. If that happens, we will seek legal redress against the Customer AND the Revdex.com, to recover damages to our Company that are incurred as a result of this frivolous and irresponsible complaint.
Respectfully Submitted,
[redacted], President