Gene's Refrigeration, Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/15) */
I have credited the customer's account for the $chargeThe balance is no longer due
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/07/16) */
Consumer called into Revdex.com for business response explanationConsumer acknowledged and accepted
business response

I am rejecting this response because: Thank you for your response, however, I wanted to point out that despite my husband and I not being home, my in laws (whom are home owners themselves and are extremely familiar with our home ) were present during the service visit so I do not see what the difference would have been as to whether or not the service person expressed his concerns to them or us respectivelyMy in laws called me to advise me of the situation and what the serviceman had instructed them when the service gentleman was in his truck "completing his paperwork"I promptly told them to have the service man call me when he comes back into the houseA very short time later I received another call from my in laws stating that the serviceman stated that I was to call the Gene's office to discuss the situationI promptly called the office, in which Genes indicated that I did notI first spoke to a female whom I do not recall her name who then transferred me to a gentleman who I believe was JimI explained the details to Jim as I understood them and I advised him of our "extreme concerns"I also advised Jim that I wanted to speak to the serviceman and ask if the furnace was safe to run, what our risks were, and I wanted further instruction as to whether or not the serviceman had switched our furnace to the electric heat pump or how I could turn off the LP heat and just run it off the electric heat pumpAt that time Jim either called the serviceman or spoke to him in the office, he did not put me on hold, I could hear Jim's side of the conversation in which Jim asked the serviceman in regards to my question about the LP/heat pump and he informed the service man of my fearsJim returned to the line and advised that the serviceman did not switch the heat to the heat pump only as that was not an available function and he also stated that the serviceman said "it should not be an issue this week because the temperatures are warmer and your heat will run off your electric heat pump"In addition, Jim said that the serviceman indicated that we needed a new furnace and he could come to our home the same evening for an estimateI have attached the estimate from Jim dated the same day as the service callAgain, when Jim was at our home, we addressed the "extreme concern" about the CO reading and again was advised by him that "you should have no problems this week because your furnace will not run on the LP because of the warmer temperatures"He also instructed that the new furnace would be installed before the temperatures would fall and gave us an estimated install of the following FridayThis did not calm our concern and did express that to Jim.I do not have an invoice from the 2nd serviceman that came to our house as I can not locate it however I have attached the invoice from the third company/serviceman to come to our homePlease see attachedAdditionally, The service that was originally supposed to be provided was a "check and tune" as indicated on my invoice, please clarify what is included in the "tune" as I can only identify that a "check" was completedThe 3rd company that performed a "check and tune" indicated that he checked and "cleaned the burners, flame sensor, furnace cabinet, drain trap" in which I am thinking perhaps this is the "tune?" If your serviceman was just giving us our options, not indicating that we had an issue, not indicating that we had to replace the heat ex-changer, not indicating that we had an issue with CO, and not indicating that the furnace perhaps should possibly be replaced why did he not perform a "tune" or clean the unit like the 3rd company did? Also why does your company advertise a "check and tune" and then only perform a "check?" Please advise what the tune entails?

I’m sorry but after further review, we do not feel that a refund is warranted. A check and tune was completed (Refer to out technician’s notes: “Checked and changed the 16" ez flex filter, which had heavy build upWiped the interior and exterior of the furnacePulled and cleaned the flame sensorBurners show rusting and wear, which cost $to replaceThe heat exchanger shows rusting throughoutCarbon monoxide air free reading was at 88ppm, which is high.”) Our technician did what he was supposed to do by advising the customer of the concerns…ppm air free IS a concern. The ppm as noted on the invoice provided by the "third opinion" is not the proper way to measure CO according to the manufacturer. His CO reading at the exhaust is how someone like the fire department would measure CO in your living spaceThe two tests are different. We were told by the manufacturer’s technical support that the air free reading WOULD be higher than a standard CO reading. We did what we were supposed to do...we checked the furnace and advised the customer of issues found. We do not dispute that the unit is safe to operate…just that there is reason for concern based on our diagnostic. Again, I would like to mention that in the event of further failure after our visit (i.ethe heat exchanger cracks) and there are illnesses or even worse due to carbon monoxide poisoning, we can be held liable. He actually has a responsibility to advise the customer of these issues…which is what he did. The information submitted does not change our concern for the customer’s equipmentThe equipment still has issues as proven by our information and Medina Heating’s information. I am also attaching information from Testo (testing equipment manufacturer) about CO and CO readings

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/09) */
The unit was installed six years agoAccording to the customer, the unit only started shifting within the last three years and it was shifting towards the houseIt is our experience that (1) if a unit is going to shift from the installation,
it would have shifted with the first change in temperature and (2) when a unit shifts TOWARDS the house, there is a foundation issueIf a unit shifts, it usually shifts away from the house because of the grade around the house
The industry switched to plastic pads years ago because patio stones do not hold up under the weight of the larger unitsIf the soil around the house is unstable, the plastic pad will bend to conform to the groundIt is common HVAC practice to install these units with a plastic pad
Manufacturer warranties require annual maintenance and the customer admitted to never having the unit serviced (where shifting may have been noticed) and our records indicate that this is the first time the customer has contacted us for any issue including the shifting
We did send a technician out to try to level the padHe informed the homeowner that he needed gravel to place under the pad so the water will drain away and she agreed to him using the gravel under her deckWe would normally charge $for the service that has already been performed but we only charged her $When she wasn't satisfied with the result and sent photos, the install manager (***) reviewed the photos and spoke with the technicianThe unit appeared to be level and the pad was flexing to the contour of the groundThe next step would have been to send two technicians out to completely disconnect and remove the unit and replace the pad with another plastic padAgain, this is something that we would normally charge $but *** offered it to her for an additional $
Given that: through the homeowner's admission, the unit only started shifting within the last three years, the unit was shifting towards the house instead of away, the plastic pad is designed to adapt to the ground and will flex accordingly, we tried to resolve this issue at a reduced price, and the homeowner waited three years before contacting us, we do not feel that a refund is justified

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/22) */
On 8/3/15, we were scheduled to diagnose an AC that kept runningOur tech found the AC out of refrigerant, indicating a leakHe recharged the system and put in dye so that we could find the leakThe $charge was for the diagnostic,
freon, dye and labor (that included the return to see where the dye leaked out)We returned in days (industry standard) and found the coil located above the furnace (which is part of the AC, not the furnace) was leakingThere is nothing wrong with the furnace and the technician informed the customer that the furnace was OKTo repair the AC, the coil must be replaced
In regards to the invoice, all of our technicians went mobile in The customer should have been given the option to provide an email address so that an invoice could be emailedIf the customer does not have (or does not elect to provide) an email address, the technician is supposed to note on their invoice for the office to mail a copyThe technician did not note that an invoice needed to be mailedThat was an oversight on his part if the customer requested a mailed copyThe customer could have called the office to request a copy and one would have been mailed that day
In addition to the detail on the $charge as noted above, I am attaching copies of the invoices to this claim and I am putting copies in the mail to them as well

There are multiple reasons why three companies could come up with different diagnostics. Had the customer been home at the time of the service, our technician would have been able to show him the issues that he discovered and the carbon monoxide readings that he obtained during the visit on
December 1, 2016. He also would have been able to discuss the safety issues and answer any questions the customer would have had in relation to the safety concerns…possibly calming any fears the family may have had. This also could have been accomplished by the customer calling our office to inquire about the “extreme concern” that the family had “despite having three carbon monoxide detectors in the home”. At no point did our technician note that there was carbon monoxide in the house (as determined by the “second opinion” representative)…only that the furnace was not operating as it should and the potential for concern. Based on our technician’s diagnostic of the rusted burners, rust in the heat exchanger, and higher carbon monoxide readings at the time of his visit, he was not wrong to advise the customer of these issues that can potentially cause unsafe operation of his furnace In the event of further failure after our visit (i.ethe heat exchanger cracks) and there are illnesses or even worse due to carbon monoxide poisoning, we can be held liable. He actually has a responsibility to advise the customer of these issues…which is what he did. The “third opinion” representative noted that the CO output in the exhaust was 42ppm. We do not know if this is an air free reading and still may have led to a discussion (or notes on the invoice with the customer not present) about potential safety issues as we normally see ranges between 20ppm and 30ppm air free under operation. A heat exchanger replacement CAN cost approximately $1,600. The warranty status on his unit was not determined at the time of service and labor is not included in a manufacturer’s warrantyWe feel that our technician did what he was supposed to do…check the unit and inform the customer of issues that he observed. If it was unsafe to operate, he would have been required to shut the unit off Before making any determination on the requested refund, we would like to see the reports from the “second” and “third” companies that show their notes and their CO air free readings