Actual repair has not been done as of this date. They have not been reliable in doing what they say they will do so far. I would like the case to remain open until repairs have been completedThank you
Thank you for the opportunity to address this issueWe will call our customer today to explain again that when our plumber returns from vacation this Thursday we will schedule a time for him to go back out and ascertain the damage, then we can send a repairmanWe appreciate her patience and
understanding
. On June 28, 2015, the [redacted]’s inspector identified and documented a puddle of water during the house inspection, but he was not sure of the source for the water leak because he is not a licensed plumber.2. On July 8, the previous home owner agreed to hire a licensed plumber to fix the following: “The active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room.”3. On August 19, the [redacted]’s officially moved into the residence. They started using the powder room and discovered a puddle of water that was large enough to destroy two cardboard boxes on the basement floor beside the PVC drain. 4. By that evidence, the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” was not fixed.5. On September 4, realtor [redacted] called to request Baumann Plumbing to return to the premise to fix the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room.” Baumann Plumbing did not tell her that the [redacted]’s would have pay $150 COD just for a site visit to the residence. They also did not state that fact when calling [redacted] about the leak the morning of Sept 8. Also there is no reference of the COD requirement on Bauman's website, including the online work order form. D6OOn September 8, the [redacted]’s paid the $150 for the site visit, because [redacted], with a 2-year old child, felt threatened by the intimidating manner by which the owner Steve Baumann conducted himself on the phone and the plumber wasn't to leave until the bill was paid. During the visit, [redacted] asked the plumber if he had looked at the toilet when he had originally entered the home at end of July. He said he flushed it once but never looked at it further. [redacted] also asked him if he checked if there was a presence of a leak that he seen in the inspection picture, AFTER he had fixed the sink and he said he did not look to see if there was still a leak coming from the PVC drain in the basement.7. On September 22, there is still, “the active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” and with no attempt from Baumann Plumbing to honor what they were hired to fix. Given the intimidating and extremely unprofessional customer service by the owner and constant bickering from Baumann Plumbing, I would never recommend their services.Regards,[redacted]
Our plumber was out to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015 for the previous home owner, [redacted]. We had three (3) items to repair per the home inspection report: Leak in PVC drain in the powder room. Drain valve on the hot water tank. Tub spout in upstairs hall bathroom. Our plumber discovered on Thursday, July 30, 2015, that the leak in the powder room was actually coming from the hot and cold water supply hoses on the pedestal lavatory faucet, not the PVC drain as noted in the inspection report. He then replaced the water supply hoses. This repaired the leak in the powder room to the basement. He then ran water and flushed the toilet several times to make sure nothing was leaking into the basement. No leaks were present at this time. This plumbing repair was completed. On Friday, September 4, 2015, 36 days later, we received a telephone call from [redacted], the realtor for the current home owners, [redacted] & [redacted]. [redacted] stated the leak was still in the powder room. Our plumber was dispatched to the residence again on Tuesday, September 8, 2015. On evaluation the plumber discovered the toilet was leaking at the base. The toilet was not leaking on Thursday, July 30, 2015. The toilet leaking at the base is a new plumbing problem and service call. This would require the toilet to be pulled and reset to replace the wax ring under the toilet. The service call charges would be a one (1) hour minimum labor charge of $70.00, and $80.00 service call fee, plus the cost of the wax ring. When our plumber was dispatched to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015, he was there to repair three (3) unrelated plumbing issues 36 days before the telephone call from [redacted]. [redacted], the current home owner, did not want to pay Fritz Baumann and Son’s, Inc. to have this repair completed. Instead she wanted us to repair this unrelated problem and bill the previous home owner, or complete the repair for free. Our company is a C.O.D. business. On Thursday, July 30, 2015 the toilet in the powder room was in good working condition with no leaks. Therefore, there is no work from this date that should be honored at no charge or repaired for free. We have talked and confirmed with the previous home owner that all the repairs were complete on July 30, 2015, and when our plumber was finished there were no plumbing leaks or issues of any kind. He also stated there was never a problem with the toilet leaking at the base. The inspection report does not indicate any problems at the toilet. At the end of the day we are caught between the previous home owner and the new home owner and who should pay for this plumbing issue.
Actual repair has not been done as of this date. They have not been reliable in doing what they say they will do so far. I would like the case to remain open until repairs have been completedThank you
Thank you for the opportunity to address this issueWe will call our customer today to explain again that when our plumber returns from vacation this Thursday we will schedule a time for him to go back out and ascertain the damage, then we can send a repairmanWe appreciate her patience and
understanding
. On June 28, 2015, the [redacted]’s inspector identified and documented a puddle of water during the house inspection, but he was not sure of the source for the water leak because he is not a licensed plumber.2. On July 8, the previous home owner agreed to hire a licensed plumber to fix the following: “The active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room.”3. On August 19, the [redacted]’s officially moved into the residence. They started using the powder room and discovered a puddle of water that was large enough to destroy two cardboard boxes on the basement floor beside the PVC drain. 4. By that evidence, the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” was not fixed.5. On September 4, realtor [redacted] called to request Baumann Plumbing to return to the premise to fix the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room.” Baumann Plumbing did not tell her that the [redacted]’s would have pay $150 COD just for a site visit to the residence. They also did not state that fact when calling [redacted] about the leak the morning of Sept 8. Also there is no reference of the COD requirement on Bauman's website, including the online work order form. D6OOn September 8, the [redacted]’s paid the $150 for the site visit, because [redacted], with a 2-year old child, felt threatened by the intimidating manner by which the owner Steve Baumann conducted himself on the phone and the plumber wasn't to leave until the bill was paid. During the visit, [redacted] asked the plumber if he had looked at the toilet when he had originally entered the home at end of July. He said he flushed it once but never looked at it further. [redacted] also asked him if he checked if there was a presence of a leak that he seen in the inspection picture, AFTER he had fixed the sink and he said he did not look to see if there was still a leak coming from the PVC drain in the basement.7. On September 22, there is still, “the active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” and with no attempt from Baumann Plumbing to honor what they were hired to fix. Given the intimidating and extremely unprofessional customer service by the owner and constant bickering from Baumann Plumbing, I would never recommend their services.Regards,[redacted]
[redacted]s repaired the wall today. We believe this resolves the matter. We appreciate her patience and her business.
Our plumber was out to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015 for the previous home owner, [redacted]. We had three (3) items to repair per the home inspection report: Leak in PVC drain in the powder room. Drain valve on the hot water tank. Tub spout in upstairs hall bathroom. Our plumber discovered on Thursday, July 30, 2015, that the leak in the powder room was actually coming from the hot and cold water supply hoses on the pedestal lavatory faucet, not the PVC drain as noted in the inspection report. He then replaced the water supply hoses. This repaired the leak in the powder room to the basement. He then ran water and flushed the toilet several times to make sure nothing was leaking into the basement. No leaks were present at this time. This plumbing repair was completed. On Friday, September 4, 2015, 36 days later, we received a telephone call from [redacted], the realtor for the current home owners, [redacted] & [redacted]. [redacted] stated the leak was still in the powder room. Our plumber was dispatched to the residence again on Tuesday, September 8, 2015. On evaluation the plumber discovered the toilet was leaking at the base. The toilet was not leaking on Thursday, July 30, 2015. The toilet leaking at the base is a new plumbing problem and service call. This would require the toilet to be pulled and reset to replace the wax ring under the toilet. The service call charges would be a one (1) hour minimum labor charge of $70.00, and $80.00 service call fee, plus the cost of the wax ring. When our plumber was dispatched to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015, he was there to repair three (3) unrelated plumbing issues 36 days before the telephone call from [redacted]. [redacted], the current home owner, did not want to pay Fritz Baumann and Son’s, Inc. to have this repair completed. Instead she wanted us to repair this unrelated problem and bill the previous home owner, or complete the repair for free. Our company is a C.O.D. business. On Thursday, July 30, 2015 the toilet in the powder room was in good working condition with no leaks. Therefore, there is no work from this date that should be honored at no charge or repaired for free. We have talked and confirmed with the previous home owner that all the repairs were complete on July 30, 2015, and when our plumber was finished there were no plumbing leaks or issues of any kind. He also stated there was never a problem with the toilet leaking at the base. The inspection report does not indicate any problems at the toilet. At the end of the day we are caught between the previous home owner and the new home owner and who should pay for this plumbing issue.