Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: [Your Answer Here] [redacted] rejects the statements made by G&R[redacted] G&R never submitted a proposal for $50,000, nor was such an amount agreed to G&R was informed of the other flooring contractor bids (2), the highest being $30,which included the cost of the flooring, sub-flooring, carting services for the debris and commercial grade polyurethane sealing, among other things [redacted] was assured that the cost of the entire project would be less due to the "friends and family discount" the father-in-law was providing [redacted] by using his son-in-law (Gabor G [redacted] of G&R) Originally the cost of the flooring was to be paid by the father-in-law as part of his potential partnership with ***, however, since the partnership was not formally agreed to [redacted] paid the expense with the understanding that it would be considered a monetary investment in the business Since no partnership was ever agreed to G&R subsequently demanded $50,[redacted] It was always required that G&R would put down commercial grade polyurethane, [redacted] is a ground floor commercial space with high foot traffic[redacted] G&R failed to remove debris costing [redacted] additional monies for their removal[redacted] G&R has two (2) sets of keys they failed to return resulting in an additional expense to [redacted] of $to replace the locks[redacted] The floors were already level as this commercial space was fully renovated years prior by the landlord, Peter Ting and ***[redacted] paid $10,approximately for the flooring, G&R paid nothing[redacted] The base boards installed by G&R were part of the original flooring agreement and the expense of G&R not *** The boards installed were of inferior quality and poorly installed (in some areas missing entirely) and will therefore have to be completely redone for an additional $1,[redacted] The sub-floor material expense was the responsibility of G&R as part of the flooring job[redacted] All of the bottoms of the furniture in [redacted] have felt on them[redacted] The mistake made by G&R when applying the first coat of sealant set [redacted] back by one (1) week and incurring over $5,in additional rent payments[redacted] G&R destroyed a door and door frame leading to an outside storage area and it will cost [redacted] and additional $1,to replace the door and have it hung[redacted] will have to have the floor resealed due to G&R not applying commercial grade polyurethane to the floors, this will cost approximately $3,[redacted] will have to close the business for at least one (1) week in order to reseal the floor costing [redacted] an additional $15,in lost income[redacted] demands repayment for the additional rent payments, door replacement, base board replacement, resealing the floor and lost income In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: [Your Answer Here] [redacted] rejects the statements made by G&R[redacted] G&R never submitted a proposal for $50,000, nor was such an amount agreed to G&R was informed of the other flooring contractor bids (2), the highest being $30,which included the cost of the flooring, sub-flooring, carting services for the debris and commercial grade polyurethane sealing, among other things [redacted] was assured that the cost of the entire project would be less due to the "friends and family discount" the father-in-law was providing [redacted] by using his son-in-law (Gabor G [redacted] of G&R) Originally the cost of the flooring was to be paid by the father-in-law as part of his potential partnership with ***, however, since the partnership was not formally agreed to [redacted] paid the expense with the understanding that it would be considered a monetary investment in the business Since no partnership was ever agreed to G&R subsequently demanded $50,[redacted] It was always required that G&R would put down commercial grade polyurethane, [redacted] is a ground floor commercial space with high foot traffic[redacted] G&R failed to remove debris costing [redacted] additional monies for their removal[redacted] G&R has two (2) sets of keys they failed to return resulting in an additional expense to [redacted] of $to replace the locks[redacted] The floors were already level as this commercial space was fully renovated years prior by the landlord, Peter Ting and ***[redacted] paid $10,approximately for the flooring, G&R paid nothing[redacted] The base boards installed by G&R were part of the original flooring agreement and the expense of G&R not *** The boards installed were of inferior quality and poorly installed (in some areas missing entirely) and will therefore have to be completely redone for an additional $1,[redacted] The sub-floor material expense was the responsibility of G&R as part of the flooring job[redacted] All of the bottoms of the furniture in [redacted] have felt on them[redacted] The mistake made by G&R when applying the first coat of sealant set [redacted] back by one (1) week and incurring over $5,in additional rent payments[redacted] G&R destroyed a door and door frame leading to an outside storage area and it will cost [redacted] and additional $1,to replace the door and have it hung[redacted] will have to have the floor resealed due to G&R not applying commercial grade polyurethane to the floors, this will cost approximately $3,[redacted] will have to close the business for at least one (1) week in order to reseal the floor costing [redacted] an additional $15,in lost income[redacted] demands repayment for the additional rent payments, door replacement, base board replacement, resealing the floor and lost income In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]