This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer concern filed on October 1, 2015.Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) received the complaint via email onOctober 1, Paul Davis was hired on February 3, to handle the mitigation, contentscleaning and property repairs of the ***’s residence resulting from a fireWe are surprised tohear from the client through the Revdex.com over ten months after the project was completed withconcerns of theft and disappointment in production time.With regard to the desired outcome “no further contact with the business” and desired settlement“stop contacting me” Paul Davis has not been in touch with the ***’s since the completion ofthe project in late 2014/early 2015, nor have they reached out to Paul Davis to relay the allegedservice concerns outlined in their complaint.In December the ***’s did contact a junior manager to discuss contents questions and toreview repairable and un-repairable inventoriesThese conversations were amicable and drew toa close with the end of the projectThere was not any contact with senior management regardingtheft accusations, which Paul Davis takes very seriouslyOur teams go through rigorousbackground checks and ongoing training for the proper handling of customer’s personalpossessionsWe have reviewed the files of this project and firmly believe that there was not anytheft of jewelry.We recognize going through the repair process from a fire can be very daunting and emotionallyupsetting, it is always our goal to ease the burdens of our clients and treat them, their possessionsand their homes with the utmost care and respectWhile re recognize there may have been somecommunication gaps due employee transitions, we do not feel the ***’s didn’t receive goodcraftsmanship and a quality end product from a team who took pride in their work and care inhow the ***’s felt.With regards to the time period to restore a property and belongings, much of that is dependentupon external factors such as decisions from an insurance company, agreements with theproperty owner’s production availability and so forthThere does not appear to be anytimeframes far from the ordinary concerning the timelines of this project from my review.We are disappointed to hear they are dissatisfied with the end resultAt this time we do not feelthere is anything we can offer given the time gone by and their unwillingness to discuss
Ms [redacted] is correct in that our work has a warranty of one year from the date of completionItwas the understanding of our team and the flooring company that the flooring issues were finallyresolved when they were last at her home.Prior to Ms [redacted] ’s rebuttal to the Revdex.com, she provided notice to her management firm, [redacted] , that there are still flooring issues still outstandingIn a final effort to resolve allmatters regarding the floor issues still outstanding, representatives of [redacted] , IdealPlumbing and Paul Davis will meet with Ms [redacted] on January 7thWe are hopeful that a finalresolution to Ms [redacted] ’s concerns regarding her flooring can be accomplished at that time
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
*** ***
This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer complaint filed on November 17, 2015.On October 19, 2015 Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) employee, [redacted], responded to a call from [redacted] of Ideal Plumbing regarding a water loss requiring mitigation...
services at [redacted], [redacted], [redacted], in units [redacted] and [redacted]. Per their phone conversation, two technicians were dispatched to place drying equipment in unit [redacted].On October 20th, Paul Davis completed the work in unit [redacted] and reviewed the water damage in Ms. [redacted]’s unit, #[redacted]. Ms. [redacted]’s unit has sustained damage to a portion of the parquet floor in the kitchen which was irreparable and would need to be removed. In order to mitigate the kitchen area, small holes were drilled into the ceiling drywall in the kitchen, as well as around the exterior base of the peninsula. Once the holes were drilled, Paul Davis set up fans to force air through the drywall with the goal is to bring the material back to a dry standard. Our technicians also set up a temporary containment wall to assist in controlling the migration of dust and debris throughout the unit. The temporary wall consisted of four millimeter plastic including zippers for doors and four zip poles (to hold up the plastic). This temporary wall is designed to create a smaller drying chamber which utilizes less energy. The equipment also creates quite a bit of heat and the chamber is set up to control those areas, making it more comfortable for the customer.After demolition of the kitchen floor was complete, ram board was placed on the floor where the parquet flooring was removed as to not cause tripping hazards for Ms. [redacted] due to the different elevations between existing flooring and concrete. During this time, [redacted] brought a Kitchen Aid mixer back to Paul Davis’ electronics department for evaluation and cleaning. This mixer was still in the box, however the bottom of the box had shown light water damage, this cleaning and evaluation was just done as courtesy to the customer.While Paul Davis has staff employees who handle the mitigation work, it subcontracts structural repair work based on a specific trade. Once October 21st, [redacted] met with the subcontractors to discuss a plan for the floor repairs. It was determined at that time that it would be tough to match the parquet flooring due to wear and tear so the remaining flooring would have to be removed and replaced. Mr. [redacted] informed the customer of this process and retrieved flooring samples for the customer to review. He relayed that the drywall repair would be completed between October 28th and 29th. The remainder of the flooring would be removed during this same time so as not to disrupt Ms. [redacted].From October 23rd through October 27th, the drying of the unit was completed and flooring samples were dropped off with Ms. [redacted] for her selection and approval.On October 28th the technicians arrived with a supervisor to remove the flooring. Contents were moved from a closet inside the kitchen area to an area outside of the containment. After the flooring was removed, the drywallers entered the unit to patch the affected ceiling and holes behind where the baseboard would be on the outside perimeter of the bar.On October 29th the drywallers returned to finish patching the walls and followed up with painting.On October 31st Ms. [redacted] left a voicemail for Mr. [redacted] stating that she had $700.00 missing from her unit. [redacted] followed up with Ms. [redacted] on November 1st regarding the missing money and took down specific information which he relayed to his supervisor. Later that day [redacted], from the [redacted], contacted [redacted] to discuss the matter further. Our mitigation crew had just undergone the process of getting finger printed due to a job we were doing for Milwaukee County. [redacted] inquired about the police department taking fingerprints so as to compare those with the Paul Davis employees and [redacted] stated that he might do so. It was later found out that fingerprints were not taken on the first visit to the home. Paul Davis inquired with the [redacted], and asked for a return visit to the home to retrieve the prints. It was realized by the Police Department on the return visit to the unit that they were going to be unsuccessful retrieving any fingerprints.On November 9th, 11th and 17th, Paul Davis continued to work in [redacted]’s home completing repair work.While Paul Davis does background checks on all its employees, we do not have the same criteria for our subcontractors. Each subcontractor must carry liability and worker’s compensation insurance. However, we contacted the subcontractor to have him verify the employees who were in Ms. [redacted]’s home. The owner stated that his employees have worked for him for over 5 years and has never had anyone accuse them of stealing.Paul Davis works in well over 1,000 homes and businesses each year. We take the claim of theft very seriously. While it is unfortunate that Ms. [redacted] claims to have had $700.00 stolen fromher home, without legitimate proof we cannot accuse anyone of taking it. There may have alsobeen other parties entering the home as the property manager had to provide access to Ms.[redacted]’s unit. Please be clear that we are not accusing anyone of stealing this money and notdiscounting that the money was or was not there. If evidence were to appear that an employeeof Paul David did in fact take this money, it would be grounds for immediate termination and wewould provide full cooperation with the [redacted].Even though Ms. [redacted] has filed this claim with the Revdex.com, she continues to allow Paul Davis tocomplete the work in her unit. Our employees have maintained their professionalism andcontinue to do so while working in her home. Since this claim is ever present and looming overthis project, we are unclear as to why Ms. [redacted] would continue to have us work in her home.We are scheduled to finish the remaining punchlist and flooring items in the next two weeks.Sincerely,[redacted]Customer Service Advocate
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]i just received the response from Paul Davis and absolutely reject it. First of all I have been asking for a written response from Paul Davis regarding what work they have completed, what the warranties are on each of them, and the actual agencies that did the work. I have complained about the bracket for my closet door that was thrown out by Paul Davis or one of their subcontractors. When [redacted] from Paul Davis, left on Dec 5, he said Paul Davis will not complete the rest of the work unless I sign off. They even acknowledged in their last lette to the Revdex.com that they closed their file. I have no idea what the warranty is on the floor, the dry wall, my carpet or whatever work they did. I don't know what work they did. In regards to [redacted], they are not a part of this. Initially, when I had the money taken, I did notify [redacted] and my condo board. As time went on, it became evident to me that they were not going to help me with anything and I sent them a letter on Nov 17, informing them that basically they've been no help to me and I would pursue everything on my own. I have not sent them anything since Nov 17, and I certainly didn't send them anything about my floor. Although they did recommend Ideal Plumbing and Paul Davis Restoration, I mistakenly thought they would help me. This didn't happen. They apparently have been staying in contact with Ideal Plumbing and Paul Davis Restoration. i was told that a phone call occurred between [redacted] and Paul Davis and I have no idea who else was involved with that call. The President of the condo board told me there had been a phone call. When I started questioning him about this call, he wouldn't tell me anything. I believe that [redacted] assisted Paul Davis in finding reasons not to give me the $700. In the letter to the Revdex.com from Paul Davis, one of the excuses was our building maintence man could have taken the money since he had a key to my unit. Paul Davis has blamed everyone else for the missing money and have conveniently dismissed their part in the whole thing. [redacted] has never responded to me regarding anything. I'm not planning on dealing with [redacted]. Ideal Plumbing has also never responded to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer concern filed on October 1, 2015.Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) received the complaint via email onOctober 1, 2015. Paul Davis was hired on February 3, 2014 to handle the mitigation, contentscleaning and property...
repairs of the [redacted]’s residence resulting from a fire. We are surprised tohear from the client through the Revdex.com over ten months after the project was completed withconcerns of theft and disappointment in production time.With regard to the desired outcome “no further contact with the business” and desired settlement“stop contacting me” Paul Davis has not been in touch with the [redacted]’s since the completion ofthe project in late 2014/early 2015, nor have they reached out to Paul Davis to relay the allegedservice concerns outlined in their complaint.In December 2014 the [redacted]’s did contact a junior manager to discuss contents questions and toreview repairable and un-repairable inventories. These conversations were amicable and drew toa close with the end of the project. There was not any contact with senior management regardingtheft accusations, which Paul Davis takes very seriously. Our teams go through rigorousbackground checks and ongoing training for the proper handling of customer’s personalpossessions. We have reviewed the files of this project and firmly believe that there was not anytheft of jewelry.We recognize going through the repair process from a fire can be very daunting and emotionallyupsetting, it is always our goal to ease the burdens of our clients and treat them, their possessionsand their homes with the utmost care and respect. While re recognize there may have been somecommunication gaps due employee transitions, we do not feel the [redacted]’s didn’t receive goodcraftsmanship and a quality end product from a team who took pride in their work and care inhow the [redacted]’s felt.With regards to the time period to restore a property and belongings, much of that is dependentupon external factors such as decisions from an insurance company, agreements with theproperty owner’s production availability and so forth. There does not appear to be anytimeframes far from the ordinary concerning the timelines of this project from my review.We are disappointed to hear they are dissatisfied with the end result. At this time we do not feelthere is anything we can offer given the time gone by and their unwillingness to discuss.
Ms. [redacted] is correct in that our work has a warranty of one year from the date of completion. Itwas the understanding of our team and the flooring company that the flooring issues were finallyresolved when they were last at her home.Prior to Ms. [redacted]’s rebuttal to the Revdex.com, she provided notice to her management firm, [redacted], that there are still flooring issues still outstanding. In a final effort to resolve allmatters regarding the floor issues still outstanding, representatives of [redacted], IdealPlumbing and Paul Davis will meet with Ms. [redacted] on January 7th. We are hopeful that a finalresolution to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns regarding her flooring can be accomplished at that time.
October 26, 2016 Revdex.com of Wisconsin10101 West Greenfield AvenueSuite 125Milwaukee, WI 53214 Re: [redacted] Customer Complaint #[redacted] Dear Sir/Madam This letter is...
in response to the above-referenced customer complaint filed on October 15, 2016. Mr. [redacted] called our office via our after-hours call center on August 29, 2016. He was requesting the services of [redacted] due to damages from a fire at his next door neighbor’s home on August 13, 2016. Our emergency responder, Jim Perencevic, returned Mr. [redacted]’ call wherein they discussed providing limited board up services. Both parties agreed to a $100.00 board-up fee for two openings. Mr. [redacted] later called the office back to cancel our services. Mr. [redacted]’ customer file was therefore closed. Mr. [redacted] stated he called [redacted] again on October 10, 2016 and did not receive a return call. Unfortunately, due to his file being closed, no return call was made at that time. I contacted Mr. [redacted] on October 20, 2016. He informed me that he was looking for an estimate to repair siding on his home. Mr. [redacted]’ customer file was then reopened after our conversation. [redacted] estimator, Adam [redacted], was assigned to this loss and set an appointment with Mr. [redacted] for today, October 25, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Mr. [redacted] left a message for Mr. [redacted] 30 minutes prior to their appointment and cancelled this meeting. If you require any additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, [redacted]Customer Service Advocate
This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer concern filed on October 1, 2015.Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) received the complaint via email onOctober 1, Paul Davis was hired on February 3, to handle the mitigation, contentscleaning and property repairs of the ***’s residence resulting from a fireWe are surprised tohear from the client through the Revdex.com over ten months after the project was completed withconcerns of theft and disappointment in production time.With regard to the desired outcome “no further contact with the business” and desired settlement“stop contacting me” Paul Davis has not been in touch with the ***’s since the completion ofthe project in late 2014/early 2015, nor have they reached out to Paul Davis to relay the allegedservice concerns outlined in their complaint.In December the ***’s did contact a junior manager to discuss contents questions and toreview repairable and un-repairable inventoriesThese conversations were amicable and drew toa close with the end of the projectThere was not any contact with senior management regardingtheft accusations, which Paul Davis takes very seriouslyOur teams go through rigorousbackground checks and ongoing training for the proper handling of customer’s personalpossessionsWe have reviewed the files of this project and firmly believe that there was not anytheft of jewelry.We recognize going through the repair process from a fire can be very daunting and emotionallyupsetting, it is always our goal to ease the burdens of our clients and treat them, their possessionsand their homes with the utmost care and respectWhile re recognize there may have been somecommunication gaps due employee transitions, we do not feel the ***’s didn’t receive goodcraftsmanship and a quality end product from a team who took pride in their work and care inhow the ***’s felt.With regards to the time period to restore a property and belongings, much of that is dependentupon external factors such as decisions from an insurance company, agreements with theproperty owner’s production availability and so forthThere does not appear to be anytimeframes far from the ordinary concerning the timelines of this project from my review.We are disappointed to hear they are dissatisfied with the end resultAt this time we do not feelthere is anything we can offer given the time gone by and their unwillingness to discuss
Ms [redacted] is correct in that our work has a warranty of one year from the date of completionItwas the understanding of our team and the flooring company that the flooring issues were finallyresolved when they were last at her home.Prior to Ms [redacted] ’s rebuttal to the Revdex.com, she provided notice to her management firm, [redacted] , that there are still flooring issues still outstandingIn a final effort to resolve allmatters regarding the floor issues still outstanding, representatives of [redacted] , IdealPlumbing and Paul Davis will meet with Ms [redacted] on January 7thWe are hopeful that a finalresolution to Ms [redacted] ’s concerns regarding her flooring can be accomplished at that time
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
*** ***
This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer complaint filed on November 17, 2015.On October 19, 2015 Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) employee, [redacted], responded to a call from [redacted] of Ideal Plumbing regarding a water loss requiring mitigation...
services at [redacted], [redacted], [redacted], in units [redacted] and [redacted]. Per their phone conversation, two technicians were dispatched to place drying equipment in unit [redacted].On October 20th, Paul Davis completed the work in unit [redacted] and reviewed the water damage in Ms. [redacted]’s unit, #[redacted]. Ms. [redacted]’s unit has sustained damage to a portion of the parquet floor in the kitchen which was irreparable and would need to be removed. In order to mitigate the kitchen area, small holes were drilled into the ceiling drywall in the kitchen, as well as around the exterior base of the peninsula. Once the holes were drilled, Paul Davis set up fans to force air through the drywall with the goal is to bring the material back to a dry standard. Our technicians also set up a temporary containment wall to assist in controlling the migration of dust and debris throughout the unit. The temporary wall consisted of four millimeter plastic including zippers for doors and four zip poles (to hold up the plastic). This temporary wall is designed to create a smaller drying chamber which utilizes less energy. The equipment also creates quite a bit of heat and the chamber is set up to control those areas, making it more comfortable for the customer.After demolition of the kitchen floor was complete, ram board was placed on the floor where the parquet flooring was removed as to not cause tripping hazards for Ms. [redacted] due to the different elevations between existing flooring and concrete. During this time, [redacted] brought a Kitchen Aid mixer back to Paul Davis’ electronics department for evaluation and cleaning. This mixer was still in the box, however the bottom of the box had shown light water damage, this cleaning and evaluation was just done as courtesy to the customer.While Paul Davis has staff employees who handle the mitigation work, it subcontracts structural repair work based on a specific trade. Once October 21st, [redacted] met with the subcontractors to discuss a plan for the floor repairs. It was determined at that time that it would be tough to match the parquet flooring due to wear and tear so the remaining flooring would have to be removed and replaced. Mr. [redacted] informed the customer of this process and retrieved flooring samples for the customer to review. He relayed that the drywall repair would be completed between October 28th and 29th. The remainder of the flooring would be removed during this same time so as not to disrupt Ms. [redacted].From October 23rd through October 27th, the drying of the unit was completed and flooring samples were dropped off with Ms. [redacted] for her selection and approval.On October 28th the technicians arrived with a supervisor to remove the flooring. Contents were moved from a closet inside the kitchen area to an area outside of the containment. After the flooring was removed, the drywallers entered the unit to patch the affected ceiling and holes behind where the baseboard would be on the outside perimeter of the bar.On October 29th the drywallers returned to finish patching the walls and followed up with painting.On October 31st Ms. [redacted] left a voicemail for Mr. [redacted] stating that she had $700.00 missing from her unit. [redacted] followed up with Ms. [redacted] on November 1st regarding the missing money and took down specific information which he relayed to his supervisor. Later that day [redacted], from the [redacted], contacted [redacted] to discuss the matter further. Our mitigation crew had just undergone the process of getting finger printed due to a job we were doing for Milwaukee County. [redacted] inquired about the police department taking fingerprints so as to compare those with the Paul Davis employees and [redacted] stated that he might do so. It was later found out that fingerprints were not taken on the first visit to the home. Paul Davis inquired with the [redacted], and asked for a return visit to the home to retrieve the prints. It was realized by the Police Department on the return visit to the unit that they were going to be unsuccessful retrieving any fingerprints.On November 9th, 11th and 17th, Paul Davis continued to work in [redacted]’s home completing repair work.While Paul Davis does background checks on all its employees, we do not have the same criteria for our subcontractors. Each subcontractor must carry liability and worker’s compensation insurance. However, we contacted the subcontractor to have him verify the employees who were in Ms. [redacted]’s home. The owner stated that his employees have worked for him for over 5 years and has never had anyone accuse them of stealing.Paul Davis works in well over 1,000 homes and businesses each year. We take the claim of theft very seriously. While it is unfortunate that Ms. [redacted] claims to have had $700.00 stolen fromher home, without legitimate proof we cannot accuse anyone of taking it. There may have alsobeen other parties entering the home as the property manager had to provide access to Ms.[redacted]’s unit. Please be clear that we are not accusing anyone of stealing this money and notdiscounting that the money was or was not there. If evidence were to appear that an employeeof Paul David did in fact take this money, it would be grounds for immediate termination and wewould provide full cooperation with the [redacted].Even though Ms. [redacted] has filed this claim with the Revdex.com, she continues to allow Paul Davis tocomplete the work in her unit. Our employees have maintained their professionalism andcontinue to do so while working in her home. Since this claim is ever present and looming overthis project, we are unclear as to why Ms. [redacted] would continue to have us work in her home.We are scheduled to finish the remaining punchlist and flooring items in the next two weeks.Sincerely,[redacted]Customer Service Advocate
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]i just received the response from Paul Davis and absolutely reject it. First of all I have been asking for a written response from Paul Davis regarding what work they have completed, what the warranties are on each of them, and the actual agencies that did the work. I have complained about the bracket for my closet door that was thrown out by Paul Davis or one of their subcontractors. When [redacted] from Paul Davis, left on Dec 5, he said Paul Davis will not complete the rest of the work unless I sign off. They even acknowledged in their last lette to the Revdex.com that they closed their file. I have no idea what the warranty is on the floor, the dry wall, my carpet or whatever work they did. I don't know what work they did. In regards to [redacted], they are not a part of this. Initially, when I had the money taken, I did notify [redacted] and my condo board. As time went on, it became evident to me that they were not going to help me with anything and I sent them a letter on Nov 17, informing them that basically they've been no help to me and I would pursue everything on my own. I have not sent them anything since Nov 17, and I certainly didn't send them anything about my floor. Although they did recommend Ideal Plumbing and Paul Davis Restoration, I mistakenly thought they would help me. This didn't happen. They apparently have been staying in contact with Ideal Plumbing and Paul Davis Restoration. i was told that a phone call occurred between [redacted] and Paul Davis and I have no idea who else was involved with that call. The President of the condo board told me there had been a phone call. When I started questioning him about this call, he wouldn't tell me anything. I believe that [redacted] assisted Paul Davis in finding reasons not to give me the $700. In the letter to the Revdex.com from Paul Davis, one of the excuses was our building maintence man could have taken the money since he had a key to my unit. Paul Davis has blamed everyone else for the missing money and have conveniently dismissed their part in the whole thing. [redacted] has never responded to me regarding anything. I'm not planning on dealing with [redacted]. Ideal Plumbing has also never responded to me.
Regards,
[redacted]
This letter is in response to the above-referenced customer concern filed on October 1, 2015.Paul Davis Restoration & Remodeling (“Paul Davis”) received the complaint via email onOctober 1, 2015. Paul Davis was hired on February 3, 2014 to handle the mitigation, contentscleaning and property...
repairs of the [redacted]’s residence resulting from a fire. We are surprised tohear from the client through the Revdex.com over ten months after the project was completed withconcerns of theft and disappointment in production time.With regard to the desired outcome “no further contact with the business” and desired settlement“stop contacting me” Paul Davis has not been in touch with the [redacted]’s since the completion ofthe project in late 2014/early 2015, nor have they reached out to Paul Davis to relay the allegedservice concerns outlined in their complaint.In December 2014 the [redacted]’s did contact a junior manager to discuss contents questions and toreview repairable and un-repairable inventories. These conversations were amicable and drew toa close with the end of the project. There was not any contact with senior management regardingtheft accusations, which Paul Davis takes very seriously. Our teams go through rigorousbackground checks and ongoing training for the proper handling of customer’s personalpossessions. We have reviewed the files of this project and firmly believe that there was not anytheft of jewelry.We recognize going through the repair process from a fire can be very daunting and emotionallyupsetting, it is always our goal to ease the burdens of our clients and treat them, their possessionsand their homes with the utmost care and respect. While re recognize there may have been somecommunication gaps due employee transitions, we do not feel the [redacted]’s didn’t receive goodcraftsmanship and a quality end product from a team who took pride in their work and care inhow the [redacted]’s felt.With regards to the time period to restore a property and belongings, much of that is dependentupon external factors such as decisions from an insurance company, agreements with theproperty owner’s production availability and so forth. There does not appear to be anytimeframes far from the ordinary concerning the timelines of this project from my review.We are disappointed to hear they are dissatisfied with the end result. At this time we do not feelthere is anything we can offer given the time gone by and their unwillingness to discuss.
Ms. [redacted] is correct in that our work has a warranty of one year from the date of completion. Itwas the understanding of our team and the flooring company that the flooring issues were finallyresolved when they were last at her home.Prior to Ms. [redacted]’s rebuttal to the Revdex.com, she provided notice to her management firm, [redacted], that there are still flooring issues still outstanding. In a final effort to resolve allmatters regarding the floor issues still outstanding, representatives of [redacted], IdealPlumbing and Paul Davis will meet with Ms. [redacted] on January 7th. We are hopeful that a finalresolution to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns regarding her flooring can be accomplished at that time.
October 26, 2016 Revdex.com of Wisconsin10101 West Greenfield AvenueSuite 125Milwaukee, WI 53214 Re: [redacted] Customer Complaint #[redacted] Dear Sir/Madam This letter is...
in response to the above-referenced customer complaint filed on October 15, 2016. Mr. [redacted] called our office via our after-hours call center on August 29, 2016. He was requesting the services of [redacted] due to damages from a fire at his next door neighbor’s home on August 13, 2016. Our emergency responder, Jim Perencevic, returned Mr. [redacted]’ call wherein they discussed providing limited board up services. Both parties agreed to a $100.00 board-up fee for two openings. Mr. [redacted] later called the office back to cancel our services. Mr. [redacted]’ customer file was therefore closed. Mr. [redacted] stated he called [redacted] again on October 10, 2016 and did not receive a return call. Unfortunately, due to his file being closed, no return call was made at that time. I contacted Mr. [redacted] on October 20, 2016. He informed me that he was looking for an estimate to repair siding on his home. Mr. [redacted]’ customer file was then reopened after our conversation. [redacted] estimator, Adam [redacted], was assigned to this loss and set an appointment with Mr. [redacted] for today, October 25, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Mr. [redacted] left a message for Mr. [redacted] 30 minutes prior to their appointment and cancelled this meeting. If you require any additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, [redacted]Customer Service Advocate