Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint The contractor disclaims any responsibility I am very disappointed with this response and with the following separate response via email: “I have responded to your complaint to the Revdex.comI have also attached a copy of the agreement which you signed prior to the inspectionIf you recall it was out of a favor to you that I fit you in on a [redacted] while you were in townYou proceeded to follow me throughout the entire inspection which is a total distraction from the job I was trying to accomplishYes, It took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report which is still ahead of industry standards and Much of your complaints are for things that are beyond the scope of the agreement or my SOP and were reported on as a courtesyThat inspection took me [redacted] ***, mostly because you were tailing me the whole time and I couldn’t complete my notes or my routine properly Please stop smearing my name in the public forums, I provided you with an adequate report under the Standards of Practice(also included here).” The contractor provides numerous poor excuses for his poor performance: · “I fit you in on a [redacted] .” This was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention If this timing and your schedule over the next week was not conducive to a thorough job, the contractor should not have accepted the work The contractor is the professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if the timing would prevent him from doing his job · That it was distracting for me to follow you throughout the inspection This was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention If the contractor had given any indication that it would be better if I had not followed him, I would not have done so The contractor is the professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if I was distracting him that he could not do his job · “It took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report.” The contractor inspected the home on [redacted] , [redacted] ** He delivered the inspection report via email at [redacted] ***on [redacted] ** Counting from midnight [redacted] , that’s [redacted] *** Of course, the inconvenience would have been only temporary if the report then received had been accurate and thorough Unfortunately, it was clear that, by the time the contractor got around to writing the report, you had only limited recollection of the inspection and/or, as admitted in the quoted email response, insufficient notes · The contractor sent “Standards of Practice”, which I attach for reference, and claims that our complaints are outside of the Standards of Practice Our primary complaint is that there was major bowing and structural damage to the carport, resulting in extensive leaking, and that multiple repair contractors concluded without prompting that our inspector should have picked up on [redacted] of the standards of practice that the contractor sent provides “The inspector shall inspect attached balconies, carports, and porches; and report as Deficient deficiencies in accessible components.” The particular damage that we are now repairing to our attached carport at great expense falls squarely within this Standard of Practice · In the contractor's Revdex.com response, he indicates that Paragraph of our Agreement (attached) excludes “out buildings; such as carports and detached sheds.” The Agreement is attached I note that (1) Paragraph only references the “home/building”, without specifically excluding anything, (2) even if “out buildings” are excluded, our carport is clearly attached to and part of the one “building” that is our house and (3) as noted above, the relevant Standards of Practice clearly require the contractor to inspect attached carports I hope that in light of the foregoing the contractor will reconsider his responsibility and promptly refund the cost of the inspection, which will help my family to cover a very small part of the cost of the expensive repairs we must make to the home we just purchased Regards, [redacted]
Please find attached the agreement for the services that I performed [redacted]th 2014. In this agreement you will find that in paragraph 1. it is an inspection of the "home/building" and out buildings; such as carports and detached sheds are not part of the scope of the inspection and therefore...
do not get inspected.
I understand most of their issues are with things beyond the scope of the inspection and were never reported on. The screens were present but not in place, and my SOP from the State of Texas requires me to report that as deficient. I also believe I reported a dishwasher as not functioning as intended at the time of the inspection. There are a great number of reasons why this may have been true to me at the time of the inspection and then show up as functioning after the inspection; I may have overlooked the separate power switch for that particular appliance.
Their complaint lives outside of the agreement that was made with me and I take no responsibility for any of their present circumstances.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.
The contractor disclaims any responsibility. I am very disappointed with this response and with the following separate response via
email:
“I have responded to your complaint to the Revdex.com. I have also attached a copy
of the agreement which you signed prior to the inspection. If you recall it was
out of a favor to you that I fit you in on a [redacted] while you were in town. You
proceeded to follow me throughout the entire inspection which is a total
distraction from the job I was trying to accomplish. Yes, It took me just over
[redacted] to deliver the report which is still ahead of industry standards and
Much of your complaints are for things that are beyond the scope of the
agreement or my SOP and were reported on as a courtesy. That inspection took me
[redacted], mostly because you were tailing me the whole time and I couldn’t
complete my notes or my routine properly.
Please stop smearing my name in the public forums, I provided you with an
adequate report under the Standards of Practice. (also included here).”
The contractor provides numerous poor excuses for his poor performance:
· “I
fit you in on a [redacted].” This was a massive investment for me and my
family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention. If this timing and
your schedule over the next week was not conducive to a thorough job, the contractor
should not have accepted the work. The contractor is the professional, and it was
his responsibility to tell me if the timing would prevent him from doing his
job.
· That
it was distracting for me to follow you throughout the inspection. This
was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's
close attention. If the contractor had given any indication that it would be better
if I had not followed him, I would not have done so. The contractor is the
professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if I was distracting
him that he could not do his job.
· “It
took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report.” The contractor inspected the home
on [redacted], [redacted]. He delivered the inspection report via email at
[redacted]. on [redacted]. Counting from midnight [redacted], that’s
[redacted]. Of course, the inconvenience would have been
only temporary if the report then received had been accurate and
thorough. Unfortunately, it was clear that, by the time the contractor got around to
writing the report, you had only limited recollection of the inspection and/or,
as admitted in the quoted email response, insufficient notes.
· The contractor
sent “Standards of Practice”, which I attach for reference, and claims that our
complaints are outside of the Standards of Practice. Our primary
complaint is that there was major bowing and structural damage to the carport,
resulting in extensive leaking, and that multiple repair contractors concluded without
prompting that our inspector should have picked up on. [redacted]
of the standards of practice that the contractor sent provides “The inspector shall
inspect attached balconies, carports, and porches; … and report as Deficient …
deficiencies in accessible components.” The particular damage that we are
now repairing to our attached carport at great expense falls squarely within
this Standard of Practice.
· In the contractor's Revdex.com response, he indicates that Paragraph 1 of our Agreement (attached) excludes “out
buildings; such as carports and detached sheds.” The Agreement is
attached. I note that (1) Paragraph 1 only references the
“home/building”, without specifically excluding anything, (2) even if “out
buildings” are excluded, our carport is clearly attached to and part of the one
“building” that is our house and (3) as noted above, the relevant Standards of
Practice clearly require the contractor to inspect attached carports.
I hope that in light of the foregoing the contractor will reconsider his
responsibility and promptly refund the cost of the inspection, which will help
my family to cover a very small part of the cost of the expensive repairs we
must make to the home we just purchased.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint The contractor disclaims any responsibility I am very disappointed with this response and with the following separate response via email: “I have responded to your complaint to the Revdex.comI have also attached a copy of the agreement which you signed prior to the inspectionIf you recall it was out of a favor to you that I fit you in on a [redacted] while you were in townYou proceeded to follow me throughout the entire inspection which is a total distraction from the job I was trying to accomplishYes, It took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report which is still ahead of industry standards and Much of your complaints are for things that are beyond the scope of the agreement or my SOP and were reported on as a courtesyThat inspection took me [redacted] ***, mostly because you were tailing me the whole time and I couldn’t complete my notes or my routine properly Please stop smearing my name in the public forums, I provided you with an adequate report under the Standards of Practice(also included here).” The contractor provides numerous poor excuses for his poor performance: · “I fit you in on a [redacted] .” This was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention If this timing and your schedule over the next week was not conducive to a thorough job, the contractor should not have accepted the work The contractor is the professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if the timing would prevent him from doing his job · That it was distracting for me to follow you throughout the inspection This was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention If the contractor had given any indication that it would be better if I had not followed him, I would not have done so The contractor is the professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if I was distracting him that he could not do his job · “It took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report.” The contractor inspected the home on [redacted] , [redacted] ** He delivered the inspection report via email at [redacted] ***on [redacted] ** Counting from midnight [redacted] , that’s [redacted] *** Of course, the inconvenience would have been only temporary if the report then received had been accurate and thorough Unfortunately, it was clear that, by the time the contractor got around to writing the report, you had only limited recollection of the inspection and/or, as admitted in the quoted email response, insufficient notes · The contractor sent “Standards of Practice”, which I attach for reference, and claims that our complaints are outside of the Standards of Practice Our primary complaint is that there was major bowing and structural damage to the carport, resulting in extensive leaking, and that multiple repair contractors concluded without prompting that our inspector should have picked up on [redacted] of the standards of practice that the contractor sent provides “The inspector shall inspect attached balconies, carports, and porches; and report as Deficient deficiencies in accessible components.” The particular damage that we are now repairing to our attached carport at great expense falls squarely within this Standard of Practice · In the contractor's Revdex.com response, he indicates that Paragraph of our Agreement (attached) excludes “out buildings; such as carports and detached sheds.” The Agreement is attached I note that (1) Paragraph only references the “home/building”, without specifically excluding anything, (2) even if “out buildings” are excluded, our carport is clearly attached to and part of the one “building” that is our house and (3) as noted above, the relevant Standards of Practice clearly require the contractor to inspect attached carports I hope that in light of the foregoing the contractor will reconsider his responsibility and promptly refund the cost of the inspection, which will help my family to cover a very small part of the cost of the expensive repairs we must make to the home we just purchased Regards, [redacted]
Please find attached the agreement for the services that I performed [redacted]th 2014. In this agreement you will find that in paragraph 1. it is an inspection of the "home/building" and out buildings; such as carports and detached sheds are not part of the scope of the inspection and therefore...
do not get inspected.
I understand most of their issues are with things beyond the scope of the inspection and were never reported on. The screens were present but not in place, and my SOP from the State of Texas requires me to report that as deficient. I also believe I reported a dishwasher as not functioning as intended at the time of the inspection. There are a great number of reasons why this may have been true to me at the time of the inspection and then show up as functioning after the inspection; I may have overlooked the separate power switch for that particular appliance.
Their complaint lives outside of the agreement that was made with me and I take no responsibility for any of their present circumstances.
Thank you,
[redacted]
Greater Houston Home Inspections
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.
The contractor disclaims any responsibility. I am very disappointed with this response and with the following separate response via
email:
“I have responded to your complaint to the Revdex.com. I have also attached a copy
of the agreement which you signed prior to the inspection. If you recall it was
out of a favor to you that I fit you in on a [redacted] while you were in town. You
proceeded to follow me throughout the entire inspection which is a total
distraction from the job I was trying to accomplish. Yes, It took me just over
[redacted] to deliver the report which is still ahead of industry standards and
Much of your complaints are for things that are beyond the scope of the
agreement or my SOP and were reported on as a courtesy. That inspection took me
[redacted], mostly because you were tailing me the whole time and I couldn’t
complete my notes or my routine properly.
Please stop smearing my name in the public forums, I provided you with an
adequate report under the Standards of Practice. (also included here).”
The contractor provides numerous poor excuses for his poor performance:
· “I
fit you in on a [redacted].” This was a massive investment for me and my
family and we were depending on the contractor's close attention. If this timing and
your schedule over the next week was not conducive to a thorough job, the contractor
should not have accepted the work. The contractor is the professional, and it was
his responsibility to tell me if the timing would prevent him from doing his
job.
· That
it was distracting for me to follow you throughout the inspection. This
was a massive investment for me and my family and we were depending on the contractor's
close attention. If the contractor had given any indication that it would be better
if I had not followed him, I would not have done so. The contractor is the
professional, and it was his responsibility to tell me if I was distracting
him that he could not do his job.
· “It
took me just over [redacted] to deliver the report.” The contractor inspected the home
on [redacted], [redacted]. He delivered the inspection report via email at
[redacted]. on [redacted]. Counting from midnight [redacted], that’s
[redacted]. Of course, the inconvenience would have been
only temporary if the report then received had been accurate and
thorough. Unfortunately, it was clear that, by the time the contractor got around to
writing the report, you had only limited recollection of the inspection and/or,
as admitted in the quoted email response, insufficient notes.
· The contractor
sent “Standards of Practice”, which I attach for reference, and claims that our
complaints are outside of the Standards of Practice. Our primary
complaint is that there was major bowing and structural damage to the carport,
resulting in extensive leaking, and that multiple repair contractors concluded without
prompting that our inspector should have picked up on. [redacted]
of the standards of practice that the contractor sent provides “The inspector shall
inspect attached balconies, carports, and porches; … and report as Deficient …
deficiencies in accessible components.” The particular damage that we are
now repairing to our attached carport at great expense falls squarely within
this Standard of Practice.
· In the contractor's Revdex.com response, he indicates that Paragraph 1 of our Agreement (attached) excludes “out
buildings; such as carports and detached sheds.” The Agreement is
attached. I note that (1) Paragraph 1 only references the
“home/building”, without specifically excluding anything, (2) even if “out
buildings” are excluded, our carport is clearly attached to and part of the one
“building” that is our house and (3) as noted above, the relevant Standards of
Practice clearly require the contractor to inspect attached carports.
I hope that in light of the foregoing the contractor will reconsider his
responsibility and promptly refund the cost of the inspection, which will help
my family to cover a very small part of the cost of the expensive repairs we
must make to the home we just purchased.
Regards,
[redacted]