Gene's Refrigeration, Heating & Air Conditioning

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (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, 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, 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

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/04/09) */ The unit was installed six years ago. According to the customer, the unit only started shifting within the last three years and it was shifting towards the house. It 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 issue. If a unit shifts, it usually shifts away from the house because of the grade around the house. The industry switched to plastic pads 20 years ago because patio stones do not hold up under the weight of the larger units. If the soil around the house is unstable, the plastic pad will bend to conform to the ground. It 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 pad. He 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 deck. We would normally charge $425.00 for the service that has already been performed but we only charged her $178.00. When she wasn't satisfied with the result and sent photos, the install manager (***) reviewed the photos and spoke with the technician. The unit appeared to be level and the pad was flexing to the contour of the ground. The next step would have been to send two technicians out to completely disconnect and remove the unit and replace the pad with another plastic pad. Again, this is something that we would normally charge $425.00 but [redacted] offered it to her for an additional $225.00. 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.