Independent Restoration Professionals

Mr***, You have not allowed my company to perform ANY restoration services to your home, precluding our ability to install your water heater in the proper manner with permits, etc We have only performed the emergency mitigation and consulting services What you are demanding from us should be performed during the restoration of your home When your old water heater leaked, it damaged (among other things) the platform upon which it was originally installed In order to properly perform emergency mitigation services, we were forced to remove your water heater from its original location and the platform was demolished in order to dry the structure As a service to you, we temporarily installed your new water heater in an alternative location and restored hot water to your home You agreed to this and we negotiated the cost of this temporary installation with your insurance company The plan all along, as stated verbally and in writing, was for our company to negotiate the settlement with your insurance company, then return to perform restoration services, where the proper installation of the water heater would have been performed by my company After reaching an agreement with your insurance company for the cost to make all the repairs (including the proper installation of your water heater), you have elected to hire another party to perform these repairs Accordingly, it is up to you and your new contractor to install the water heater in its proper location, pull permits, perform code upgrades, etc You have been paid by your insurance company for the work and, therefore, have the money to pay someone to do it Your complaint has changed several times over the course of our discussions If you really do not have a problem with the consultation fee as you just stated, then please just pay the fee as invoiced and we will drop our collection and legal pursuits Our contract absolutely meets the legal requirements/definition of a contract and has been reviewed by attorneys and judges alike If you continue down the path of a hopeful technicality salvation, I assure you that we are prepared to meet your challenge in any arena You will not winI believe I have addressed every one of your accusations and have documentation to support our position Please pay your bill and focus your energy now on the restoration of your home Respectfully, [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 For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below ***: Whereas you feel I owe an obligation based on contract-addendum, I have had an attorney conversation and correspondence with my [redacted] Ins agent that quite frankly disagrees for the reasons I earlier mentioned (and others) regarding a non-enforceable contract Basically, no work, no payment for profit or overhead! I also disagree with the argument that a temporary installation of a water heater, warrants a breach in safety protocol which is what those water heater permits are about in the first place Your sub contractor installed it, I assumed it would be done according to codeI did not have an issue with waiting for the heater to come on line as soon as demolition dry wall done, as I repeatedly questioned him about , but was told it would be done in Phase II This is ridiculous as it warrants then installations rather than I had no problem waiting a day or two or more for that to occur without hot water! My contractor did all the dry wall repairs in less then hrs I have a "red sticker"posted from gas company, that indicated the heater after your people temporarily installed it was not up to safety code My contractor plumber also indicated there were other breaches in safety or sound plumbing practices I have tried to mediate some settlementto avoid court, as you and I are obviously busy people who have better things to occupy our time I was shunned in that earlier attempt by your office manager, so I will give this one more try I assume you see the logic in this as it would be a "win-win" for both parties I will let your contractor do the work of installing a carpet to house as per last estimate, with any changes in my selection of carpet and pad and with some modification in the actual work involved that I can take care of quite easily If you are a company genuinely interested in the consumer at a time in need as your advertisement exclaims, rather than one who would prefer to milk the system for all it is worth, this offer will make sense to you My point is, let's you and I end this in a gentlemanly manner by the above work which I am reluctant to do to include your 20% overhead, but will if this is preferred to going to court and as you indicated dragging this out, which I am prepared to do, even for a slim chance of a favorable court outcome, which you know is always possible If this does not seem fair, then we are fortunate to be in a country where there are courts and judges to ultimately decide these civil matters Respectfully, [redacted]

To Whom it May Concern: Mr***'s complaint is without merit This is a dispute over invoicing and his accusations regarding him being a victim of a "scam" are baseless We were contracted by Mr [redacted] on January 21, 2015, after he suffered damages caused by a leak in his plumbing The leak resulted in significant water damage in several rooms of his home He hired IRP to perform emergency mitigation and restoration services and for consulting to negotiate on his behalf with his homeowner's insurance company It is generally difficult to ascertain the full extent of the time and effort that is spent on mitigation workTherefore, we mutually agreed that the cost for the mitigation work was "To be determined and agreed upon with (owner's) insurance carrier" Before beginning any work to Mr***'s property, we executed a contact that has been attached for your review Mr [redacted] was given a carbon copy of the executed contract (all pages) on January 21, 2015, prior to the inception of the mitigation services It includes the Work Authorization, the 3-Day Notice of Right to Cancel and a Notice that has additional disclosures Please note the second page (yellow) of the Authorization includes Terms and Conditions that specifically state the following verbiage: " Contractor does not refund 10% overhead and 10% profit when Owner agrees to reduce scope of work or elects to cash out terms..." On January 28, 2015, we again reviewed the above contract language with Mr [redacted] and confirmed that he wanted us to continue with the restoration and insurance consulting portion of the project To make sure he understood the terms of our contract with clarity, we offered him a Consultation Addendum that simply highlights the terms of our executed contract A copy of the signed Consultation Addendum has been attached for your review While under contract to do so, we performed mitigation services, met with Mr***'s insurance company, communicated with them over several phone calls and emails and reached an agreement for the mitigation and restoration phases, totaling $2,and $7,102.68, respectively Additionally, Mr [redacted] asked us to prepare several other estimate for non-insurance related work After reviewing our estimates, he elected to not use us for the restoration work Accordingly, we submitted our invoices to Mr [redacted] for the full amount of the agreed upon mitigation work ($2,598.84) and the 20% consulting fee ($1,192.68) for the agreed upon, insurance-related restoration work Mr [redacted] has paid for the mitigation work but refuses to pay the consulting feeWe have had several conversations with Mr [redacted] regarding his outstanding invoice and he continues to refuse payment We are preparing a suit against him for the breach of contract and will consider the defamation portion of this complaint in our future action against him If you have any questions regarding my response to the complaint or the attached documents, please feel free to contact me directly Respectfully, [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. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below. The Consultation Addendum and Contract is not the issue in my compaint, It is about installing a water heater, contrary to code. A safety hazard, as no permit was provided, and other discrepancies that indicated the heater may have been operating at higher water pressure than safe., operated without earthquake straps, operated on the ground and not 1 [redacted] above. However in regard to the contract and addendum, I never did accept the estimate, as the wording of addendum is vague as to acceptable by whom? Certainly not by me as was obvious. A signed contract may be unenforceable for several legal criteria and these will be adjudicated in court. 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.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[redacted]:
Whereas you feel I owe an obligation based on
contract-addendum,  I have had an
attorney conversation and correspondence with my [redacted] Ins agent  that quite frankly disagrees for  the reasons
I earlier mentioned (and others) regarding a non-enforceable contract.  Basically,  no work, no payment for profit or overhead!  I also disagree with the argument that a temporary
installation of a water heater, warrants a breach in safety protocol  which is what those water heater permits are
about in the first place.   Your sub contractor installed it,  I assumed it would be done according to code. I
did not have an issue with waiting for the heater to come on line as soon as
demolition dry wall done,  as I
repeatedly questioned him about , but was told it would be done in Phase
II.  This is ridiculous as it warrants
then 2 installations rather than 1.  I
had no problem waiting a day or two or more  for that to occur without hot water!  My contractor did all the dry wall repairs  in less then   hrs.    I  have a "red sticker"posted  from gas company, that indicated  the heater after your people temporarily
installed it  was not up to safety  code.   My contractor plumber also  indicated  there were other breaches in safety or sound
plumbing practices.  
I have
tried to mediate  some  settlement. to avoid court,  as you and I are obviously busy people who
have better things to occupy our time.   I
was shunned in that earlier attempt by your office manager,  so I will give this one more try.  I assume you see the logic in this as it would
be a "win-win" for both parties.
I will let
your contractor do the work of installing a carpet to house as per last estimate,  with any changes in my selection of carpet
and pad and with some modification in the actual work involved that I can take
care of quite easily.   If you
are a company genuinely interested in the consumer at a time in need as your advertisement exclaims, rather
than one  who would prefer to milk the
system for all it is worth,  this offer will make
sense to you.  
My point
is, let's you and I end this in a gentlemanly manner by the above work which I
am reluctant to do to include your 20% overhead, but will if this is preferred
to going to court and as you indicated dragging this out, which I am prepared
to do, even for a slim chance of a favorable  court outcome, which you know is always
possible.   If this does not seem fair, then we are
fortunate to be in a country where there are courts and judges to ultimately
decide these civil matters.
Respectfully,
[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.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The Consultation Addendum and Contract is not the issue in my compaint, It is about installing a water heater, contrary to code. A safety hazard, as no permit was provided, and other discrepancies that indicated the heater may have been operating at higher water pressure than safe., operated without earthquake straps, operated on the ground and not 1* above.  However in regard to the contract and addendum, I never did accept the estimate, as the wording of addendum is vague as to acceptable by whom?  Certainly not by me as was obvious.  A signed contract may be unenforceable for several legal criteria and these will be adjudicated in court.
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted],
You have not allowed my company to perform ANY restoration services to your home, precluding our ability to install your water heater in the proper manner with permits, etc.  We have only performed the emergency mitigation and consulting services.  What you are demanding from us should be performed during the restoration of your home. 
When your old water heater leaked, it damaged (among other things) the platform upon which it was originally installed.  In order to properly perform emergency mitigation services, we were forced to remove your water heater from its original location and the platform was demolished in order to dry the structure.  As a service to you, we temporarily installed your new water heater in an alternative location and restored hot water to your home.  You agreed to this and we negotiated the cost of this temporary installation with your insurance company.  The plan all along, as stated verbally and in writing, was for our company to negotiate the settlement with your insurance company, then return to perform restoration services, where the proper installation of the water heater would have been performed by my company.  After reaching an agreement with your insurance company for the cost to make all the repairs (including the proper installation of your water heater), you have elected to hire another party to perform these repairs.  Accordingly, it is up to you and your new contractor to install the water heater in its proper location, pull permits, perform code upgrades, etc.  You have been paid by your insurance company for the work and, therefore, have the money to pay someone to do it. 
Your complaint has changed several times over the course of our discussions.  If you really do not have a problem with the consultation fee as you just stated, then please just pay the fee as invoiced and we will drop our collection and legal pursuits.  Our contract absolutely meets the legal requirements/definition of a contract and has been reviewed by attorneys and judges alike.  If you continue down the path of a hopeful technicality salvation, I assure you that we are prepared to meet your challenge in any arena.  You will not win.
I believe I have addressed every one of your accusations and have documentation to support our position.  Please pay your bill and focus your energy now on the restoration of your home. 
Respectfully,
[redacted]

To Whom it May Concern:
Mr. [redacted]'s complaint is without merit.  This is a dispute over invoicing and his accusations regarding him being a victim of a "scam" are baseless.  
We were contracted by Mr. [redacted] on January 21, 2015, after he suffered damages caused by a leak...

in his plumbing.  The leak resulted in significant water damage in several rooms of his home.  He hired IRP to perform emergency mitigation and restoration services and for consulting to negotiate on his behalf with his homeowner's insurance company.  It is generally difficult to ascertain the full extent of the time and effort that is spent on mitigation work. Therefore, we mutually agreed that the cost for the mitigation work was "To be determined and agreed upon with (owner's) insurance carrier".  Before beginning any work to Mr. [redacted]'s property, we executed a contact that has been attached for your review.  Mr. [redacted] was given a carbon copy of the executed contract (all pages) on January 21, 2015, prior to the inception of the mitigation services.  It includes the Work Authorization, the 3-Day Notice of Right to Cancel and a Notice that has additional disclosures.  Please note the second page (yellow) of the Authorization includes Terms and Conditions that specifically state the following verbiage:
"8.  Contractor does not refund 10% overhead and 10% profit when Owner agrees to reduce scope of work or elects to cash out terms..."
On January 28, 2015, we again reviewed the above contract language with Mr. [redacted] and confirmed that he wanted us to continue with the restoration and insurance consulting portion of the project.  To make sure he understood the terms of our contract with clarity, we offered him a Consultation Addendum that simply highlights the terms of our executed contract.  A copy of the signed Consultation Addendum has been attached for your review.
While under contract to do so, we performed mitigation services, met with Mr. [redacted]'s insurance company, communicated with them over several phone calls and emails and reached an agreement for the mitigation and restoration phases, totaling $2,598.84 and $7,102.68, respectively.  Additionally, Mr. [redacted] asked us to prepare several other estimate for non-insurance related work.  After reviewing our estimates, he elected to not use us for the restoration work.  Accordingly, we submitted our invoices to Mr. [redacted] for the full amount of the agreed upon mitigation work ($2,598.84) and the 20% consulting fee ($1,192.68) for the agreed upon, insurance-related restoration work.  Mr. [redacted] has paid for the mitigation work but refuses to pay the consulting fee.
We have had several conversations with Mr. [redacted] regarding his outstanding invoice and he continues to refuse payment.  We are preparing a suit against him for the breach of contract and will consider the defamation portion of this complaint in our future action against him.
If you have any questions regarding my response to the complaint or the attached documents, please feel free to contact me directly. 
Respectfully,
[redacted]
[redacted]