The records of our dispatch log show the following:When Mr. [redacted] was concerned about continuous beeping of hisfire alarm panel, he called his regular service provider. They told himthey would not be available to go to his property for three days.Mr. [redacted] then contacted Total Life Security (TLS).During that phone call Mr. [redacted] requested that our companyremedy the beeping and perform the code-required, annual test.Within one hour a licensed, TLS technician, in a fully-equipped,service vehicle, arrived at Mr. [redacted]'s property. The technicianperformed the requested services. TLS charged our customary rates,foregoing the 2-hour minimum charge for service work.Although Mr. [redacted] is not a fire alarm technician, he judged thetroubleshooting and inspection to be "the same work". Hecharacterizes it as price gouging. Mr. [redacted] can certainly find acheaper rate in the marketplace. In fact, a lower rate, as heexplained, is offered by his normal service provider—who could notprovide service until after three days. Despite that response time ofthat other company being unacceptable to Mr. [redacted], he stilldemands that we reduce our price to match theirs.We provided a repair, and a professional report, and billedappropriately.Expect the best,Lisa [redacted]
The records of our dispatch log show the following:When Mr. [redacted] was concerned about continuous beeping of hisfire alarm panel, he called his regular service provider. They told himthey would not be available to go to his property for three days.Mr. [redacted] then contacted Total Life Security...
(TLS).During that phone call Mr. [redacted] requested that our companyremedy the beeping and perform the code-required, annual test.Within one hour a licensed, TLS technician, in a fully-equipped,service vehicle, arrived at Mr. [redacted]'s property. The technicianperformed the requested services. TLS charged our customary rates,foregoing the 2-hour minimum charge for service work.Although Mr. [redacted] is not a fire alarm technician, he judged thetroubleshooting and inspection to be "the same work". Hecharacterizes it as price gouging. Mr. [redacted] can certainly find acheaper rate in the marketplace. In fact, a lower rate, as heexplained, is offered by his normal service provider—who could notprovide service until after three days. Despite that response time ofthat other company being unacceptable to Mr. [redacted], he stilldemands that we reduce our price to match theirs.We provided a repair, and a professional report, and billedappropriately.Expect the best,Lisa [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
As seen on the inspection report, there was no extra work needed then the what is included in the annual inspection. It clearly lists Monitoring signals cleared and trouble, alarm and phone checked. That is precisely what was needed and there was no extra work needed than the cost of the Inspection and what is done with the inspection. Hence my opposition of being charged for an Inspection and extra work. On the bill, it says Cleared trouble codes and did annual inspection. $159. Then, separate line Annual Inspection $235.This is why I feel the $159 extra is not warranted. Also my complaint was with the customer service part of the business. Personally attacked and the owner had no regard to call me back.Mr. [redacted]
The records of our dispatch log show the following:When Mr. [redacted] was concerned about continuous beeping of hisfire alarm panel, he called his regular service provider. They told himthey would not be available to go to his property for three days.Mr. [redacted] then contacted Total Life Security (TLS).During that phone call Mr. [redacted] requested that our companyremedy the beeping and perform the code-required, annual test.Within one hour a licensed, TLS technician, in a fully-equipped,service vehicle, arrived at Mr. [redacted]'s property. The technicianperformed the requested services. TLS charged our customary rates,foregoing the 2-hour minimum charge for service work.Although Mr. [redacted] is not a fire alarm technician, he judged thetroubleshooting and inspection to be "the same work". Hecharacterizes it as price gouging. Mr. [redacted] can certainly find acheaper rate in the marketplace. In fact, a lower rate, as heexplained, is offered by his normal service provider—who could notprovide service until after three days. Despite that response time ofthat other company being unacceptable to Mr. [redacted], he stilldemands that we reduce our price to match theirs.We provided a repair, and a professional report, and billedappropriately.Expect the best,Lisa [redacted]
The records of our dispatch log show the following:When Mr. [redacted] was concerned about continuous beeping of hisfire alarm panel, he called his regular service provider. They told himthey would not be available to go to his property for three days.Mr. [redacted] then contacted Total Life Security...
(TLS).During that phone call Mr. [redacted] requested that our companyremedy the beeping and perform the code-required, annual test.Within one hour a licensed, TLS technician, in a fully-equipped,service vehicle, arrived at Mr. [redacted]'s property. The technicianperformed the requested services. TLS charged our customary rates,foregoing the 2-hour minimum charge for service work.Although Mr. [redacted] is not a fire alarm technician, he judged thetroubleshooting and inspection to be "the same work". Hecharacterizes it as price gouging. Mr. [redacted] can certainly find acheaper rate in the marketplace. In fact, a lower rate, as heexplained, is offered by his normal service provider—who could notprovide service until after three days. Despite that response time ofthat other company being unacceptable to Mr. [redacted], he stilldemands that we reduce our price to match theirs.We provided a repair, and a professional report, and billedappropriately.Expect the best,Lisa [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
As seen on the inspection report, there was no extra work needed then the what is included in the annual inspection. It clearly lists Monitoring signals cleared and trouble, alarm and phone checked. That is precisely what was needed and there was no extra work needed than the cost of the Inspection and what is done with the inspection. Hence my opposition of being charged for an Inspection and extra work. On the bill, it says Cleared trouble codes and did annual inspection. $159. Then, separate line Annual Inspection $235.This is why I feel the $159 extra is not warranted. Also my complaint was with the customer service part of the business. Personally attacked and the owner had no regard to call me back.Mr. [redacted]