Fred's Sanitary Service

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
 
[redacted]

Review: 10-17-2014

Fred’s Sanitary Service [redacted]

Dear Sirs

Regarding the repair of the septic system at my home address of [redacted].

I have requested several time a detailed bill for labor and materials used for the repair.

The reason I am asking for this is the job required two hrs of labor at my home, Fred’s arrived at 9:00AM and was completed at 11:00AM plus travel time and approx. 4’ of PVC 4” pipe.

An estimate was given of approx. $1400.00 before the job, I understand that due to the entire repair is covered and hard to as I have no problems accepting that. I know it would be a more expense if you addition problems were found. I knew this to be an estimate not a quote.

I have included with this note a check for $900.00 as a partial payment for invoice #84737, and will pay the balance when a reasonable and detailed breakdown is provided.Desired Settlement: Accepting the $900. I have already paid. Give a detailed billing and justify the expense

Business

Response:

I think I sent the last email a minute too soon, because I just talked to [redacted] on the phone about the job we did at his property on [redacted]. We talked at length about the work that Fred’s has done for him over the years. He mentioned he’s always been happy with the quality of our work. I assured him that at Fred’s, whenever a customer has a complaint, we want to make sure that they are satisfied, and that whatever the customer wanted as resolution is fair in our eyes. Obviously if someone is totally unreasonable we would have to take a different approach, but Mr. [redacted] is reasonable, and fair. So the resolution of accepting the $900 is totally fair as far as Fred’s is concerned. As for detailing our cost breakdown, we talked for a while about backhoe rental, labor hours, number of guys on site, set up time, contacting diggers hotline etc. I feel like we reached a common ground as to how things are priced for this type of job. As an added benefit to the customer, we offered him a free pumper next fall when his tank will come due for service. Sincerely,[redacted]Fred’s Sanitary Service

Consumer

Response:

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Review: Fred's came to our home on a service call because we had sewer back up in our basement. The plumber couldn't get the snake to operate so he sent a camera through our sewer lateral. He told us there was a "bow" or break at 30 feet from our clean out. Fred's recommended an excavator. The excavator dug down to our sewer lateral, there was no break. Fred's sent another plumber who snaked and then sent a camera down the lateral again. He told us there was a break at 16 feet from our clean out. The excavator commenced digging to that mark. There was no break. Since our property was excavated from our mailbox to our home, 60 feet long and 10 1/2 feet deep, we had the excavator install a new lateral. Why wouldn't we? It was only an addition $250 to do so. Fred's misdiagnosed a plumbing issue that cost us days off of work, material costs, excavation fees, landscaping and driveway replacement costs, stress due to these issues in addition to no cooperation to resolve these financial burdens from [redacted], the owner of Fred's. I am distraught from this experience. I hired a professional to diagnose our plumbing issues, I am severely displeased with their service, or lack there of. All in all, there was no need for excavation. There was no break, no "bow", and nothing wrong with our sewer lateral.Desired Settlement: I would like Fred's to reimburse for the costs of excavation, materials, lost work days, landscaping, replacing topsoil, driveway costs, and anguish.

Business

Response:

I received your letter dated 7-3-14 regarding case #[redacted] on 7-8-14. Let me first point out, that I am proud of the fact that this is the first complaint I have ever received from the Revdex.com, and we run over 5000 jobs per year. That may explain the A+ rating we have on your web site.

With regard to the complaint, we at Fred’s, are always eager to resolve any customer complaint with our customers. I tried to resolve this customer complaint on the phone with [redacted], and her fiancé [redacted] on 7-2-14. The conversation was with [redacted], but I could hear [redacted] in the background. Unfortunately, I couldn’t continue with a conversation that involved such colorful language. (I was called an “F” on several occasions by Mr. [redacted], and I felt threatened)

Notwithstanding the foregoing, I would like to make some points which I think are critical to your analysis of the situation.

First of all, please understand that we are not plumbers, nor do we hold ourselves out to be plumbers. Rather, we are a septic tank service that does clear blocked laterals for clients and we also have the ability to run cameras down laterals to look for significant problems.

One of my employees went to Mr. [redacted]’s home on June 27, 2014 on a job where he would check out a sewer pipe for a possible clog or broken pipe. My employee met with the owner’s fiancée, [redacted]. She stated that they had previously rented both a 50’ as well as a 100’ sewer machine but were unable to clear the lateral themselves. She showed my employee the pipe that had a section cut out and replaced with PVC pipe and rubber clamps. She told my employee that the previous owner had cut the basement floor and replaced the drain pipe. With her permission, the employee ran a camera system down the pipe. My employee asked if she could see what was being displayed on the screen for the camera. She indicated that she could see it and that it looked “cool”. The monitor showed that there was water in the pipe and with [redacted]’s approval, he pushed the camera through the pipe to enter an area of the pipe that was free of standing water. The employee explained to her that the pipe at that point was full of water. The camera moved about an additional 3 feet before it emerged from the water. The employee pulled the camera back and performed the same process three (3) times, while explaining to her what was on the camera. [redacted] acknowledged that she could see the images and understood that there was standing water in the pipe, although neither of them knew the reason for that. At a later point in the pipe the camera passed a point where there appeared to be a lip on the pipe or a broken spot. [redacted] acknowledged that she could see that object in the pipe. [redacted] asked my employee if he could tell her how far and how deep that item in the pipe was. My employee said that the camera that we currently have does not provide that information. The employee explained that we could not tell what the exact cause of the problem was but that clearly there was water in the pipe. [redacted] indicated that she thought they would have to replace the pipe. She asked whether or not our company did that and the employee said that we did not. At [redacted]’s request, we subsequently provided her with the name of a company that could perform the excavation and pipe replacement.

On July 1st, another employee went to the home at their request during the excavation of the lateral sewer line. They had encountered another blockage in the line. The employee utilized an electric sewer machine in the lateral to open it up so that he could get a camera down into the pipe. While operating the sewer machine, the employee indicated that he felt like there was some resistance just outside of the basement wall and some additional resistance a bit further down the pipe. The employee opened up the pipe so that it was now working and got the sewer camera. He ran the camera through the pipe and noticed a shiny spot on the first elbow right outside of the wall, which could have been the resistance that he felt on the sewer machine. He continued to run the camera through the pipe until he again saw something that looked like a lip. Mr. [redacted] viewed the camera monitor screen with our employee. The customer ran a significant amount of water through the pipe and were unable to make it back up after utilizing the sewer machine.

Our company, at the request of the customer, gave them a referral to an excavator. Fred’s Sanitary Service made no money or commission from the work performed by the other contractor. Mr. [redacted] and his fiancée had the opportunity to look on the monitor and see precisely what my employees saw. They reached a decision as to what they wished to do with their comments made by [redacted] would appear to indicate that there was a pre-existing problem with this pipe that had been worked on by the prior owner. We have no information as to when Mr. [redacted] purchased the home.

Our employees did not advise Mr. [redacted] that the pipe had to be replaced but, rather, indicated that they were not certain what was causing the blockage and that one of their options was to excavate and replace the pipe. If Mr. [redacted] is correct and the excavator found no leaks or bends in the pipe then it is unknown as to why water was pooling in the pipe as viewed by the sewer camera.

Fred’s Sanitary Service takes the position that they performed the work requested by the customers and gave the customers the full opportunity to review the results of the camera observations on the monitor. Fred’s Sanitary Service did not cause Mr. [redacted] and his fiancée to perform additional work and only provided them with the observations they made through their efforts with the sewer machine and the sewer camera. As such, our firm does not believe that it is in any way obligated to pay any monies to the customers.

Sincerely,

This company does not provide all services they advertise. They told us they could do a point well inspection for a closing on our home and did not complete the inspection correctly. When we spoke to them after their inspection and told them what requirements the state is asking for, they told us they couldn't do it. Yet when we called to obtain their service they told us they did. This resulted in forcing us to obtain another company to re-inspect the well and do another water test which cost us additional money. The owner refused to refund any money or pay additional expense they caused us by not doing the correct inspection to begin with.

Review: We contacted Fred's to do an inspection of our septic system to sell our home. During the inspection we were told the system appeared to be failing and they were not sure if it could be repaired or replaced. On the 2nd trip out they brought a digger along to dig a hole in the line. We then were told we would need a new system. At no time were we informed that there was an additional charge for this digging to take place. The hole was approximately 3 feet wide by 10-12 feet long and 5 feet deep. The gentleman who said he was the owner of the company said he would contact his people and they would have to do a perk test. Thus, leaving this hole completely open next to our sidewalk. No barricades/tape etc. This was left this way for over 1 week. My dog actually fell into the hole. Another gentleman showed up with another digger and a rep from the county to dig for perk tests. He was kind enough to cover this hole in with dirt. Only through conversation with the 2nd gentleman did I find out he was not even affiliated with Fred's. Subsequently he sent a proposal to us for a new system. A week or so later we received another bill from Fred's in the amount of $400.00 to dig this hole. Keep in mind all we did was hire Fred's to do an inspection of the system in the amount of $570 for which we had already paid. We did end up using the company that came out and did the perk test to replace our system. In the proposal from the company we used it also included pumping of the old tank. Last week Fred's sent another bill in the amount of $170.00 to us for pumping the tank. I sent a note to Fred's advising them I was not paying the bill. 1) we did not contact them for this service and 2) they needed to bill the company we used as it was included in the proposal for the new system. The company we used agrees Fred's needs to bill them.

Fred's is double billing.Desired Settlement: I don't believe we should have paid $400.00 for Fred's to dig this hole and just leave it. We were never told of this additional cost and would like reimbursement.

Fred's was hired for an inspection only.

I paid Fred's the $400.00 under protest as we do not want a lien put against our home considering we want to sell the property.

Business

Response:

Re: ID: [redacted] Thanks for reaching out regarding the [redacted] property. We did a real estate evaluation of the septic and well at their property on 9/15/14. While we were there we found a septic tank that was overfull and water was not draining properly. We were concerned that they had a failing septic system, but we weren’t sure because their vent pipe was dry. Also, Mr. [redacted] tried to convince us that it was not failing, telling us things like: “well it’s always a little greener in this area that goes toward the clothes line” We told them that it’s possible that there is just an issue with the outlet pipe between the septic tank and the distribution box, but that you never know until you start digging into it. We quoted them $1800 to replace the outlet pipe, to see if that was all that was needed to salvage their septic system. We also informed them that it might not solve their problem. We notified diggers hotline, and got their project on our schedule. A couple days after the initial inspection, Mrs. [redacted] called me wondering when we were going to get their pipe dug up. I informed her that diggers hotline requires 3 business days for a non-emergency marking, and that it would be done the following Tuesday. On 9-23-14 we arrived with a backhoe and started digging up the outlet pipe. After we had exposed 10-15 feet of pipe, it was clear that it was full of water, and it wasn’t just an outlet pipe problem. The pipe was the old fashioned orange burr style and we were in pipe that was surrounded by number 2 stone like the stone we see in older seepage mechanisms. Mr. [redacted] was present while we were there. I tried to explain to him that what we were seeing was a failing septic system, and rather than dig anymore, and spend any more of his money, we should have a perk test done to see what replacement options were available. He disagreed and said all we needed to do was to dig further. At that time, he needed to go somewhere to run an errand. We dug a little further, and the pipe situation didn’t improve. I knocked on the door, and Mrs. [redacted] was there. I informed to her that she had a failing septic system, and that a perk test should be done to find out what kind of replacement options were available. She said to go ahead with the perk test. It was a little awkward dealing with two spouses who differed a little bit with regard to the solution of the failing septic system. Mr. [redacted] left and was under the impression we were continuing with the digging project, and Mrs. [redacted] said to stop and order perk test. I didn’t want to create any ill will between the two, especially since we were working on a house they had lived in for 30+ years, and we were giving them bad news about their septic system. We left the pipe partially exposed in case Mr. [redacted] wanted to get a second opinion as to the future repair or replacement project. Since we didn’t perform the entire pipe replacement, we didn’t charge the full $1800. Instead we sent them a bill for $400 to cover the mobilization of a backhoe, and some exploratory digging, which they paid. I called Butler Engineering who I have worked with many times in the past. On some occasions I have had them as a sub contractor and I have managed the project. In other cases, I have just turned the customer over to them, so as to minimize the expense of the project. (ie cutting out the middle man) In this case, while talking to the guys at Butler Engineering, I informed them that I didn’t want the [redacted]s to have to pay an extra 10% or more, for me to manage the project, and that they should just move forward with the project without me, and talk to the customer directly. In this way, I saved them almost $2000. As for the $170 to pump the tank during the abandonment process for the next septic system install, we did send that bill to them in error, and we have since sent it to Butler Engineering. I hope this clears things up. I just got done talking to Mrs. [redacted] so she knew about this response, and I hope if she needs us in the future, we can help her out. Thanks again, [redacted]