Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/02/05) */
Contact Name and Title: David [redacted] Presiden
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@comcast.net
I inquired of my office staff, (including my daughter) if it was possible that they did not inform this customer of a charge to...
perform estimate. We take numerous calls per day and my daughter could not be certain that beyond doubt she had told the customer of the charge.
It is our policy to inform all customers of all of our business related charges including estimates and I stand by our commitment to do so.
Human error is always possible and I certainly feel in this case that should be in favor of this customer. I regret that this customer felt awkward about the situation. When questions arise that have to do with customer concerns or other needed information we are very customer friendly.
OFFER:
Response date 02/05/2016
Our payroll staff employee is off work today.
On Monday 02/08/2016 we will mail a full refund check of $55 to this customer at the address we have on this record.
If this customer desires any future estimates or plumbing service performed they should be aware that it is not necessary to use the Revdex.com prior to making an attempt to contact our office first.
They would have found that it would have saved them the time and cost of a letter and postage.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2016/02/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Thank you for your quick response in resolving my concern regarding not knowing about a service charge for an estimate.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/02/08) */
After receiving notice of the customer complaint, Niezgodski Plumbing Inc. immediately began reviewing all correspondences related to this service call with the intention of gathering all the necessary information from all parties involved. ...
First and foremost, our policy on billable hours states that billing begins when the technician is in route and ends when the technician leaves the site. In addition, it is noted to all customers that it is impossible to foresee the need for any additional parts and/or time and labor through the initial contact between customer and staff.
Niezgodski Plumbing Inc. is a 3rd generation family owned business performing plumbing services since 1922. We are dedicated to conducting business with integrity and sincerity and value customer satisfaction. We are happy to offer this customer a refund of $57.00 with the hope that he may understand that if confusion about billing occurs we are always happy to discuss options for a resolution.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2017/02/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I accept their response and their offer to refund me my [redacted] because I believe that this is a fair and decent outcome; however, their explanation still makes me mad! If I knew of all their "hidden charges" beforehand I would never have called Niezgodski Plumbing in the first place! To charge me for them to get to my house, along with a [redacted] truck fee, is a joke! Needless to say, I will never call Niezgodski Plumbing in the future! To be in business since 1922 makes matters even worse!!!
Signed, [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/12/12) */
We were called out as customer states to install a ice-maker waterline and to make repairs to a water closet. My service tech and helper installed a 1/4" OD poly ice-maker waterline from behind the existing refrigerator location to an area in...
the crawl space approximately 4ft from the crawl space entry in the basement. Service tech drilled a hole through the sub floor and together with helper installed the poly waterline form the main copper water piping system under the kitchen area. Service tech installed a new saddle type piercing valve on the 1/2" copper cold waterline and secured it as per the manufactures instructions. The valve was left without the valve being pierced to allow the valve to be activated with water by others, i.e. the refrigerator installer. My service tech confirmed that the valve had not been pierced and no water was flowing form the existing waterline with the provided brass compression nut and poly ferrule. Service tech performed a repair on an existing Kohler water closet in the main floor hall bathroom that required over 1.5 hours with travel time to secure parts and perform the repair. Upon completion of the toilet repair, service tech returned to the kitchen to move the old existing refrigerator back into the cavity in the cabinet area. Service tech inspected the new poly ice-maker waterline and it was totally dry and therefore could not have pressurized with water and leaked from a non-activated non-pierced ice-maker saddle valve. The partner of the homeowner informed service tech that he would like for him to record instructions on how to activate the new ice-maker waterline when the new refrigerator was installed ( new refrigerator was not yet at residence). Service tech spoke into a small electronic device. Service tech stated that someone would need to enter the crawl space and locate the ice-maker line in the crawl space and turn the tee handle on the valve clockwise until the valve stops and then turn the tee valve counterclockwise to pressurize the new water line after the new refrigerator was installed and that it would be necessary to purge or bleed air from the new waterline to activate the waterline. the gentleman at the residence played back the recording and it was clear and precise. The gentleman stated that he wanted the information for the homeowner. Service tech left detailed manufacture instructions behind the old refrigerator (original packaging directions) attached to the back wall with black electrical tape and installed a 1/4" brass compression nut and poly ferrule to allow easy hookup of the new refrigerator ice-maker by the homeowner or others when refrigerator did arrive.
As far as billing was concerned. The customer did call the following Monday and ask for an itemized bill. Unfortunately my wife who handled the original call set up was out of the office most of the week and was unable to attend to this until the following week. There was not an issue with the bill in terms of a mistake. The customer was displeased that a helper had to be sent with our service tech to perform the work. He was under the impression that because we had move the date of service in order to have the proper service tech perform the work that this meant there would only be one sole person present to do the work. That is not the case. We had to move the date of service so that a service tech smaller in size could work within the crawlspace. On all jobs performed in a crawlspace we always have another person present to not only be able to assist with the work our tech would have to perform in the crawlspace but also for proper safety precautions. Dangerous accidents can occur when a person is left working alone in confined spaces even to the extent of death. A close personal associate of mine who worked for another plumbing company many years ago was electrocuted and died in this very manner. If someone had been present with him the situation might not have been one of tragedy. Because customer was still displeased my wife took off the time charged for the helper during the time that my service tech was working on the water closet and for the time it took to pick up the parts to repair the water closet. The time charged for the helper was only for the time spent hooking up the ice-maker line which was the part of the plumbing service which required work within the crawl space. The customers itemized bill which he received shows that our helper was present on the job for 2.6667 regular time hours but it is reflected under this listing that the customer would only be charged for 1 hour for the use of our helper during the time the ice-maker line was being installed. By showing the actual time spent by helper but also noting the actual time charged for the helper of 1 hour was the most detailed manner that this invoice could reflect the true charge of the job. There was not a mistake in the billing on the job. My wife simply took off the time that was originally charged that the helper was present on the job while the water closet repairs were taking place and the time spent picking up the parts. During the entire course of the job my service tech was courteous and performed his job in a professional manner at all times. When my service tech informed me that he had given such precise instructions to the homeowners partner through a recorded means over the partners own recording device I just can't determine any means that he could be more accurate as to his recollection of what took place on the job-site and the fact that he never placed the saddle valve in a position where any water whatsoever could have come through the newly installed tubing. I believe in terms of a possible resolution being found with this customer that our business did just that when we reduced the cost of the labor for the helper during the portion of the job not directed specifically towards the ice-maker line installation. On any job that two persons are sent to work at a customers home the cost both workers is always figured into the total cost of the job. Just because only one portion of the job required the use of a helper it would be very difficult for a business to just tell the other worker to find their own way home; that they are no longer needed. I offer this as an example to show that a helper had to be sent with this service tech to perform the service and even though we took off for the time not required of the helper during repairs to the water closet, my business still had to pay the helper for his time spent on the job. As a business owner I believe that this reduction in cost which is reflected on the bill is a just and proper resolution to the customers concerns. Thank you
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2017/12/13) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It was not communicated to me that two people were needed to do this job and that I would be charged for two people. It was communicated to me that they needed to send someone who could fit in the space. When I called back the second time for the itemized bill the person who returned the call did state there was an error on the bill and it was then that I challenged being charged for two individuals. It was not stated to me the new amount was in regards to not charging fully for the second person, it was stated there was an error on the original bill.
As for the water leak, all I can say is the line was leaking as when I returned home at around 6:00 PM there was a puddle of water under the refrigerator the size of a large serving platter. Up until the time the new refrigerator was installed on Friday afternoon, about 48 hours later, I emptied a large stock pot five times as it filled up with water. It it truly was not active, why was there electrical tape over the end of the line?
I do not feel my concerns have been addressed. The itemized bill should have been presented the first time when a payment method, a credit card, was provided.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2017/12/14) */
In regards to the installation of ice-maker saddle valve and tubing. The reason for electrical tape over the end of the tubing was to hold the nut and farrell (which connects to the refrigerator) in place so there would be no chance of it falling off or being misplaced prior to connection. Also to assure no dirt would enter the end of the open tubing. When my service tech left the job site the saddle valve had not been activated.
As far as my office worker (being my wife) stating that a mistake was made on the bill. She never had the proper opportunity to explain how we were reducing the cost of our bill to reflect the helper being present on job site only for the time spent while service tech was installing ice_maker line and working in crawl space. As the customer stated he grew frustrated and hung up in the middle of the call.
Our plumbing business has been within this community since 1922. We always seek to perform quality service work. The rate we charge is the rate we need to in order to cover the cost of running our business and making payroll on a weekly basis.
In order to make an additional effort to find resolution for our business and our customer [redacted] is willing to make a further effort.
We will be willing to refund the customer the $78 fee that was billed for the helper.
However we ask something small in return from the customer and feel that it is appropriate. Had the customer taken the opportunity to speak further with my wife during their phone conversation, I am certain a resolution could have been found promptly from the beginning.
Before having the opportunity to find and provide resolution the customer gave us a negative review on at least two social media sites.
We would appreciate it very much if the customer would remove these negative reviews. If that is not possible it would be appreciated if a further review would state that resolution was found and that the situation was remedied.
I have no explanation for why water was found under the refrigerator. I cannot access what took place after we left job site and the time frame it took when the new refrigerator was brought to job site location and installed.
We never stated that this was customers fault but something took place between the time our business left the job site and when the refrigerator was actually installed.
The type of valve we use absolutely must be activated by piercing the water line by turning the handle on it in and then reversing it to begin water flow. Our service tech left the valve inactivated precisely for the reason to ensure that no water could leak from the unconnected end of tubing.
As I previously stated he then placed electrical tape over the end of the tubing to hold the nut and farrel on and to make sure no foreign debris would enter tubing.
I have to stand by this explanation of my service tech because he is a licensed professional and there simply would be no other appropriate way to complete this assembly in the manner requested of us.
I can offer no return on funds for this portion of the job.
In accordance with the water closet repair, all repairs were completed as requested.
So once again we will offer resolution to this matter by sending the customer a return of $78 promptly upon the removal or amendment of negative reviews.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2017/12/15) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not feel we are going to come to an agreement on this issue. I feel I gave the company ample opportunities to resolve my concerns. The reason I ended my call abruptly is that it was the third time I was addressing the same issue and explaining the issue of the leak. Not once did I hear an acknowledgement of any concern that the leak could have caused major damage in my home. I can not explain why there was a leak, I only know that there was a leak in the line.
As for needing two people to do the job, I would hope this company explains that to their customers going forward as at no time was that explained to me.
I no longer wish to negotiate with this firm, nor will I ever use them again. I am not modifying my reviews or deleting them as they are my experience with them. I also will not be shy about sharing my experience with them when asked.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/02/05) */
Contact Name and Title: David [redacted] Presiden
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@comcast.net
I inquired of my office staff, (including my daughter) if it was possible that they did not inform this customer of a charge to...
perform estimate. We take numerous calls per day and my daughter could not be certain that beyond doubt she had told the customer of the charge.
It is our policy to inform all customers of all of our business related charges including estimates and I stand by our commitment to do so.
Human error is always possible and I certainly feel in this case that should be in favor of this customer. I regret that this customer felt awkward about the situation. When questions arise that have to do with customer concerns or other needed information we are very customer friendly.
OFFER:
Response date 02/05/2016
Our payroll staff employee is off work today.
On Monday 02/08/2016 we will mail a full refund check of $55 to this customer at the address we have on this record.
If this customer desires any future estimates or plumbing service performed they should be aware that it is not necessary to use the Revdex.com prior to making an attempt to contact our office first.
They would have found that it would have saved them the time and cost of a letter and postage.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2016/02/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Thank you for your quick response in resolving my concern regarding not knowing about a service charge for an estimate.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/02/08) */
After receiving notice of the customer complaint, Niezgodski Plumbing Inc. immediately began reviewing all correspondences related to this service call with the intention of gathering all the necessary information from all parties involved. ...
First and foremost, our policy on billable hours states that billing begins when the technician is in route and ends when the technician leaves the site. In addition, it is noted to all customers that it is impossible to foresee the need for any additional parts and/or time and labor through the initial contact between customer and staff.
Niezgodski Plumbing Inc. is a 3rd generation family owned business performing plumbing services since 1922. We are dedicated to conducting business with integrity and sincerity and value customer satisfaction. We are happy to offer this customer a refund of $57.00 with the hope that he may understand that if confusion about billing occurs we are always happy to discuss options for a resolution.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2017/02/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I accept their response and their offer to refund me my [redacted] because I believe that this is a fair and decent outcome; however, their explanation still makes me mad! If I knew of all their "hidden charges" beforehand I would never have called Niezgodski Plumbing in the first place! To charge me for them to get to my house, along with a [redacted] truck fee, is a joke! Needless to say, I will never call Niezgodski Plumbing in the future! To be in business since 1922 makes matters even worse!!!
Signed, [redacted]
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2017/12/12) */
We were called out as customer states to install a ice-maker waterline and to make repairs to a water closet. My service tech and helper installed a 1/4" OD poly ice-maker waterline from behind the existing refrigerator location to an area in...
the crawl space approximately 4ft from the crawl space entry in the basement. Service tech drilled a hole through the sub floor and together with helper installed the poly waterline form the main copper water piping system under the kitchen area. Service tech installed a new saddle type piercing valve on the 1/2" copper cold waterline and secured it as per the manufactures instructions. The valve was left without the valve being pierced to allow the valve to be activated with water by others, i.e. the refrigerator installer. My service tech confirmed that the valve had not been pierced and no water was flowing form the existing waterline with the provided brass compression nut and poly ferrule. Service tech performed a repair on an existing Kohler water closet in the main floor hall bathroom that required over 1.5 hours with travel time to secure parts and perform the repair. Upon completion of the toilet repair, service tech returned to the kitchen to move the old existing refrigerator back into the cavity in the cabinet area. Service tech inspected the new poly ice-maker waterline and it was totally dry and therefore could not have pressurized with water and leaked from a non-activated non-pierced ice-maker saddle valve. The partner of the homeowner informed service tech that he would like for him to record instructions on how to activate the new ice-maker waterline when the new refrigerator was installed ( new refrigerator was not yet at residence). Service tech spoke into a small electronic device. Service tech stated that someone would need to enter the crawl space and locate the ice-maker line in the crawl space and turn the tee handle on the valve clockwise until the valve stops and then turn the tee valve counterclockwise to pressurize the new water line after the new refrigerator was installed and that it would be necessary to purge or bleed air from the new waterline to activate the waterline. the gentleman at the residence played back the recording and it was clear and precise. The gentleman stated that he wanted the information for the homeowner. Service tech left detailed manufacture instructions behind the old refrigerator (original packaging directions) attached to the back wall with black electrical tape and installed a 1/4" brass compression nut and poly ferrule to allow easy hookup of the new refrigerator ice-maker by the homeowner or others when refrigerator did arrive.
As far as billing was concerned. The customer did call the following Monday and ask for an itemized bill. Unfortunately my wife who handled the original call set up was out of the office most of the week and was unable to attend to this until the following week. There was not an issue with the bill in terms of a mistake. The customer was displeased that a helper had to be sent with our service tech to perform the work. He was under the impression that because we had move the date of service in order to have the proper service tech perform the work that this meant there would only be one sole person present to do the work. That is not the case. We had to move the date of service so that a service tech smaller in size could work within the crawlspace. On all jobs performed in a crawlspace we always have another person present to not only be able to assist with the work our tech would have to perform in the crawlspace but also for proper safety precautions. Dangerous accidents can occur when a person is left working alone in confined spaces even to the extent of death. A close personal associate of mine who worked for another plumbing company many years ago was electrocuted and died in this very manner. If someone had been present with him the situation might not have been one of tragedy. Because customer was still displeased my wife took off the time charged for the helper during the time that my service tech was working on the water closet and for the time it took to pick up the parts to repair the water closet. The time charged for the helper was only for the time spent hooking up the ice-maker line which was the part of the plumbing service which required work within the crawl space. The customers itemized bill which he received shows that our helper was present on the job for 2.6667 regular time hours but it is reflected under this listing that the customer would only be charged for 1 hour for the use of our helper during the time the ice-maker line was being installed. By showing the actual time spent by helper but also noting the actual time charged for the helper of 1 hour was the most detailed manner that this invoice could reflect the true charge of the job. There was not a mistake in the billing on the job. My wife simply took off the time that was originally charged that the helper was present on the job while the water closet repairs were taking place and the time spent picking up the parts. During the entire course of the job my service tech was courteous and performed his job in a professional manner at all times. When my service tech informed me that he had given such precise instructions to the homeowners partner through a recorded means over the partners own recording device I just can't determine any means that he could be more accurate as to his recollection of what took place on the job-site and the fact that he never placed the saddle valve in a position where any water whatsoever could have come through the newly installed tubing. I believe in terms of a possible resolution being found with this customer that our business did just that when we reduced the cost of the labor for the helper during the portion of the job not directed specifically towards the ice-maker line installation. On any job that two persons are sent to work at a customers home the cost both workers is always figured into the total cost of the job. Just because only one portion of the job required the use of a helper it would be very difficult for a business to just tell the other worker to find their own way home; that they are no longer needed. I offer this as an example to show that a helper had to be sent with this service tech to perform the service and even though we took off for the time not required of the helper during repairs to the water closet, my business still had to pay the helper for his time spent on the job. As a business owner I believe that this reduction in cost which is reflected on the bill is a just and proper resolution to the customers concerns. Thank you
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2017/12/13) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
It was not communicated to me that two people were needed to do this job and that I would be charged for two people. It was communicated to me that they needed to send someone who could fit in the space. When I called back the second time for the itemized bill the person who returned the call did state there was an error on the bill and it was then that I challenged being charged for two individuals. It was not stated to me the new amount was in regards to not charging fully for the second person, it was stated there was an error on the original bill.
As for the water leak, all I can say is the line was leaking as when I returned home at around 6:00 PM there was a puddle of water under the refrigerator the size of a large serving platter. Up until the time the new refrigerator was installed on Friday afternoon, about 48 hours later, I emptied a large stock pot five times as it filled up with water. It it truly was not active, why was there electrical tape over the end of the line?
I do not feel my concerns have been addressed. The itemized bill should have been presented the first time when a payment method, a credit card, was provided.
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2017/12/14) */
In regards to the installation of ice-maker saddle valve and tubing. The reason for electrical tape over the end of the tubing was to hold the nut and farrell (which connects to the refrigerator) in place so there would be no chance of it falling off or being misplaced prior to connection. Also to assure no dirt would enter the end of the open tubing. When my service tech left the job site the saddle valve had not been activated.
As far as my office worker (being my wife) stating that a mistake was made on the bill. She never had the proper opportunity to explain how we were reducing the cost of our bill to reflect the helper being present on job site only for the time spent while service tech was installing ice_maker line and working in crawl space. As the customer stated he grew frustrated and hung up in the middle of the call.
Our plumbing business has been within this community since 1922. We always seek to perform quality service work. The rate we charge is the rate we need to in order to cover the cost of running our business and making payroll on a weekly basis.
In order to make an additional effort to find resolution for our business and our customer [redacted] is willing to make a further effort.
We will be willing to refund the customer the $78 fee that was billed for the helper.
However we ask something small in return from the customer and feel that it is appropriate. Had the customer taken the opportunity to speak further with my wife during their phone conversation, I am certain a resolution could have been found promptly from the beginning.
Before having the opportunity to find and provide resolution the customer gave us a negative review on at least two social media sites.
We would appreciate it very much if the customer would remove these negative reviews. If that is not possible it would be appreciated if a further review would state that resolution was found and that the situation was remedied.
I have no explanation for why water was found under the refrigerator. I cannot access what took place after we left job site and the time frame it took when the new refrigerator was brought to job site location and installed.
We never stated that this was customers fault but something took place between the time our business left the job site and when the refrigerator was actually installed.
The type of valve we use absolutely must be activated by piercing the water line by turning the handle on it in and then reversing it to begin water flow. Our service tech left the valve inactivated precisely for the reason to ensure that no water could leak from the unconnected end of tubing.
As I previously stated he then placed electrical tape over the end of the tubing to hold the nut and farrel on and to make sure no foreign debris would enter tubing.
I have to stand by this explanation of my service tech because he is a licensed professional and there simply would be no other appropriate way to complete this assembly in the manner requested of us.
I can offer no return on funds for this portion of the job.
In accordance with the water closet repair, all repairs were completed as requested.
So once again we will offer resolution to this matter by sending the customer a return of $78 promptly upon the removal or amendment of negative reviews.
Final Consumer Response /* (4200, 11, 2017/12/15) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I do not feel we are going to come to an agreement on this issue. I feel I gave the company ample opportunities to resolve my concerns. The reason I ended my call abruptly is that it was the third time I was addressing the same issue and explaining the issue of the leak. Not once did I hear an acknowledgement of any concern that the leak could have caused major damage in my home. I can not explain why there was a leak, I only know that there was a leak in the line.
As for needing two people to do the job, I would hope this company explains that to their customers going forward as at no time was that explained to me.
I no longer wish to negotiate with this firm, nor will I ever use them again. I am not modifying my reviews or deleting them as they are my experience with them. I also will not be shy about sharing my experience with them when asked.