Our plumber was out to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 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 roomDrain valve on the hot water tankTub spout in upstairs hall bathroomOur 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 basementNo leaks were present at this time This plumbing repair was completedOn Friday, September 4, 2015, 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 roomOur plumber was dispatched to the residence again on Tuesday, September 8, On evaluation the plumber discovered the toilet was leaking at the base The toilet was not leaking on Thursday, July 30, 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 toiletThe service call charges would be a one (1) hour minimum labor charge of $70.00, and $service call fee, plus the cost of the wax ringWhen our plumber was dispatched to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015, he was there to repair three (3) unrelated plumbing issues days before the telephone call from [redacted] *** [redacted] , the current home owner, did not want to pay Fritz Baumann and Son’s, Incto 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.DbusinessOn Thursday, July 30, 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 kindHe also stated there was never a problem with the toilet leaking at the baseThe inspection report does not indicate any problems at the toiletAt 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
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 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.” On August 19, the [redacted] ’s officially moved into the residenceThey 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 By that evidence, the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” was not fixed 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 $COD just for a site visit to the residenceThey also did not state that fact when calling [redacted] about the leak the morning of Sept Also there is no reference of the COD requirement on Bauman's website, including the online work order formD6OOn September 8, the [redacted] ’s paid the $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 paidDuring the visit, [redacted] asked the plumber if he had looked at the toilet when he had originally entered the home at end of JulyHe 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 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 fixGiven 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 todayWe believe this resolves the matterWe appreciate her patience and her business
Our plumber was out to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 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 roomDrain valve on the hot water tankTub spout in upstairs hall bathroomOur 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 basementNo leaks were present at this time This plumbing repair was completedOn Friday, September 4, 2015, 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 roomOur plumber was dispatched to the residence again on Tuesday, September 8, On evaluation the plumber discovered the toilet was leaking at the base The toilet was not leaking on Thursday, July 30, 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 toiletThe service call charges would be a one (1) hour minimum labor charge of $70.00, and $service call fee, plus the cost of the wax ringWhen our plumber was dispatched to this residence on Thursday, July 30, 2015, he was there to repair three (3) unrelated plumbing issues days before the telephone call from [redacted] *** [redacted] , the current home owner, did not want to pay Fritz Baumann and Son’s, Incto 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.DbusinessOn Thursday, July 30, 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 kindHe also stated there was never a problem with the toilet leaking at the baseThe inspection report does not indicate any problems at the toiletAt 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
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 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.” On August 19, the [redacted] ’s officially moved into the residenceThey 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 By that evidence, the “active leak in the PVC drain from the powder room” was not fixed 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 $COD just for a site visit to the residenceThey also did not state that fact when calling [redacted] about the leak the morning of Sept Also there is no reference of the COD requirement on Bauman's website, including the online work order formD6OOn September 8, the [redacted] ’s paid the $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 paidDuring the visit, [redacted] asked the plumber if he had looked at the toilet when he had originally entered the home at end of JulyHe 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 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 fixGiven the intimidating and extremely unprofessional customer service by the owner and constant bickering from Baumann Plumbing, I would never recommend their services.Regards, [redacted]